 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Car Forum / Driving, Maintenance, Tuning / Driving / December 2005Mega-MFFY
http://tinypic.com/invclh.jpg This furniture delivery truck was parked along the curb behind an entire row of legally parked cars while the scumbag delivery crew went into the food court for lunch. The driver of the pickup truck on the left side of the picture as well as the driver of a (not visible in this shot) Dodge sedan were boxed in by this truck and unable to leave. If that had been my pickup truck, those muscle-heads would have returned to find a huge hole in the side of their delivery truck, directly across from the empty parking spot where my pickup truck used to be parked. > http://tinypic.com/invclh.jpg > [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > directly across from the empty parking spot where my pickup truck used > to be parked. I'd have smashed in the windshield. > > http://tinypic.com/invclh.jpg > > [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > I'd have smashed in the windshield. You're too big a pussy. > http://tinypic.com/invclh.jpg > [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > directly across from the empty parking spot where my pickup truck used > to be parked. This picture has to be a fake because there is no snow or ice on the truck :) >> http://tinypic.com/invclh.jpg >> >This picture has to be a fake because there is no snow or ice on the truck > >:) Would someone explain the joke to me? > >> http://tinypic.com/invclh.jpg > >> [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Would someone explain the joke to me? I'd guess he didn't notice the California plates on all the cars. Dave > http://tinypic.com/invclh.jpg > [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > directly across from the empty parking spot where my pickup truck used > to be parked. I would have recorded the vehicle number and reported the incident to corporate; that's very bad advertising for the company. > http://tinypic.com/invclh.jpg > [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > directly across from the empty parking spot where my pickup truck used > to be parked. You could have moved it yourself. Ten bucks says they left the keys in the ignition... Ulf > > http://tinypic.com/invclh.jpg > > [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > You could have moved it yourself. Ten bucks says they left the keys in *Excellent* idea. > the ignition... Bet you're correct there, too. Would have been a blast to move the vehicle a couple of blocks, then toss the keys into a sewer after locking the vehicle. > Ulf > > > http://tinypic.com/invclh.jpg > > > [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > locking the vehicle. > ----- OR ELSE... a person so incensed might think to phone the "800" number plastered in big numerals on the side of the truck and ask to speak to the Safety department. That seems more pro-active than taking a snap and whining about it here or childishly bragging "if"... ..."that's what I woulda done". You're all selling "wolf tickets" and buying from one another. ------ - gpsman > > > > http://tinypic.com/invclh.jpg > > > > [quoted text clipped - 25 lines] > and whining about it here or childishly bragging "if"... ..."that's > what I woulda done". That's the simple, not-very-effective solution. We're shooting for "bigger bang for the buck" > You're all selling "wolf tickets" and buying from one another. gpsman, <gpsman@driversmail.com> was motivated to say this in rec.autos.driving on 16 Dec 2005 15:42:00 -0800: > OR ELSE... a person so incensed might think to phone the "800" number > plastered in big numerals on the side of the truck and ask to speak to > the Safety department. That seems more pro-active than taking a snap > and whining about it here or childishly bragging "if"... ..."that's > what I woulda done". That presumes that (1) they have a safety department (I'm not familiar with this company, so I don't know if they have such a department) and (2) that the safety department and/or the company care. > gpsman, <gpsman@driversmail.com> was motivated to say this in > rec.autos.driving on 16 Dec 2005 15:42:00 -0800: [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > with this company, so I don't know if they have such a department) and > (2) that the safety department and/or the company care. ----- You call any company that has their own fleet and ask to speak to the Safety Dept. and you'll have any but the most moronic employee's attention. Bad driving and parking is a financial consideration to these companies, both in dollars and goodwill. I didn't call Scott on knowing the driver's motivation but they could be making a delivery. It might surprise you how few businesses ever planned for material to get *into* the store. Most of it is carried out by individuals and that's when the money comes in. When the material comes in, the money is going out. Take a look around most parking lots. Many are designed to prohibit even that small straight truck reasonable access. See them little "tree islands" in the shot? Sometimes a truck driver has to pick between a few less than optimal places to park. Often he has to choose a parking spot not on how sensible it seems but on how he might not be able to exit the lot from a particular point. There's more to driving even that little straight truck than might meet the less informed eye. ----- - gpsman >>gpsman, <gpsman@driversmail.com> was motivated to say this in >>rec.autos.driving on 16 Dec 2005 15:42:00 -0800: [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > attention. Bad driving and parking is a financial consideration to > these companies, both in dollars and goodwill. I was very close to doing that a few days ago when I caught up to a van weaving all over the place. At first I thought he was taking notes while talking on the phone or whatever, but the driver kept doing it the entire time I was behind him. The name and number of the company was printed on the rear doors, so I was tempted, but didn't bother. > I didn't call Scott on knowing the driver's motivation but they could > be making a delivery. It might surprise you how few businesses ever [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > There's more to driving even that little straight truck than might meet > the less informed eye. Yes, but if you can get in you can get out. Although that might include backing up... > ----- > > - gpsman Ulf >> http://tinypic.com/invclh.jpg >> >> This furniture delivery truck was parked along the curb behind an >> entire row of legally parked cars while the scumbag delivery crew went >> into the food court for lunch. The driver of the pickup truck on the [...] >You could have moved it yourself. Ten bucks says they left the keys in >the ignition... That would present an interesting ethical dilemma.... should I move the truck to a fire lane or a handicapped spot?  SignatureThere's no such thing as a free lunch, but certain accounting practices can result in a fully-depreciated one. > > http://tinypic.com/invclh.jpg > > [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > You could have moved it yourself. Ten bucks says they left the keys in > the ignition... And end up being charged with stealing the vehicle.. > Ulf >> http://tinypic.com/invclh.jpg >> [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > You could have moved it yourself. Ten bucks says they left the keys in > the ignition... A friends father did this to a BMW after its driver parked him and another vehicle in, about 15 years ago. After waiting patiently for nearly an hour for the BMW driver to return, he put a brick through the car's window, released the handbrake, and pushed the car out of the way. He didn't hang around to see the BMW drivers reaction. > http://tinypic.com/invclh.jpg > [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > directly across from the empty parking spot where my pickup truck used > to be parked. Things like that are why I love my cell phone plan. It gives me more minutes than I need, so I reach for it instead of my camera most of the time. Though, the camera is a good way to correct a problem, since once people notice it they start driving better. http://tinypic.com/ip8mwy.jpg http://tinypic.com/ip8n4n.jpg http://tinypic.com/ip8n6c.jpg The big truck in front was weaving, tailgating, all the things a large truck probably shouldn't do. By the last picture (third one shown) he had chilled out quite a bit, and seemed to be paying attention back in the right lane. The pictures themselves would be useless for ID'ing anyone, but he didn't know that. Dave >Things like that are why I love my cell phone plan. It gives me more >minutes than I need, so I reach for it instead of my camera most of >the time. I was not impacted by the asinine parking job, so who would I have called? The picture was a lot more useful to me as a talking point for this newsgroup (and to add to my MFFY page). > >Things like that are why I love my cell phone plan. It gives me more > >minutes than I need, so I reach for it instead of my camera most of [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > called? The picture was a lot more useful to me as a talking point for > this newsgroup (and to add to my MFFY page). Agreed that it's a good topic starter, but I'd call just to state that it impacts my opinion of the company. How many other people saw it too? How many of them thought, "those f.cking pricks" but did nothing? I've been blocked in by trucks before, but never when they were unattended. One recently I thought was, but the driver came running out when he saw me approaching my car. Any time I have been blocked the driver was willing without hesitation to move it to help me out, so I've never really had to worry. By the time my seat belt is on, I've reattached the faceplate, checked my mirrors, changed CDs, etc, they're out of my way. This case sounds like they did something that was MFFY compared with those times. Being delayed by 20 seconds isn't a big deal, but if I had to wait for someone to be finished with lunch I'd be f.cking pissed. Dave >> I was not impacted by the asinine parking job, so who would I have >> called? The picture was a lot more useful to me as a talking point for >> this newsgroup (and to add to my MFFY page). > >Agreed that it's a good topic starter, but I'd call just to state that >it impacts my opinion of the company. Which has more impact on the company: one guy calling in a complaint, or thousands of people seeing the company's truck parked illegally and knowing that the company hires thoughtless, inconsiderate boors? >How many other people saw it >too? How many of them thought, "those f.cking pricks" but did nothing? I suspect the entire food court saw them, but did not feel it was their place to get involved. >I've been blocked in by trucks before, but never when they were >unattended. One recently I thought was, but the driver came running >out when he saw me approaching my car. That's acceptable when there is literally no other choice, such as a moving van who needs to load up a housefull of family possessions in a residential neighborhood. They have no choice but to block a few driveways, but the crew is always nearby and can move the van as needed. These guys were just plain MFFY - they ignored a large, empty parking lot with plenty of space BEHIND the building and chose instead to parkillegally in front - I guess saving a few steps for themselves is worth inconveniencing everyone else. >This case sounds like they did something that was MFFY compared with >those times. Being delayed by 20 seconds isn't a big deal, but if I >had to wait for someone to be finished with lunch I'd be f.cking >pissed. These guys were away from their truck for at least 20 minutes, boxing in at least two drivers and preventing untold others from making use of the blocked parking spaces. Anyone who got pissed was fully justified. > >> I was not impacted by the asinine parking job, so who would I have > >> called? The picture was a lot more useful to me as a talking point for [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > or thousands of people seeing the company's truck parked illegally and > knowing that the company hires thoughtless, inconsiderate boors? It'd help prevent the problem if they knew about it. Not a guarantee they'll do anything, but if they don't even know about the issue what does it achieve? > >How many other people saw it > >too? How many of them thought, "those f.cking pricks" but did nothing? > > I suspect the entire food court saw them, but did not feel it was > their place to get involved. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kitty_Genovese Kitty was stabbed to death in front of at least 38 witnesses, and none did anything of significance until about a half hour too late. They all assumed someone else would do something about it. Why not just do something instead of following the herd? > >I've been blocked in by trucks before, but never when they were > >unattended. One recently I thought was, but the driver came running [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > driveways, but the crew is always nearby and can move the van as > needed. That's usually been the situation, or at my office the neighbors have blocked me in a few times. Once was a delivery truck that was illegally parked, and he gave me a huge apology about running late and just neededing to get the sh.t unloaded, but still it was under 60 seconds I had to wait before he was out of my way. > These guys were just plain MFFY - they ignored a large, empty parking > lot with plenty of space BEHIND the building and chose instead to > parkillegally in front - I guess saving a few steps for themselves is > worth inconveniencing everyone else. I agree completely. I was just stating that this wasn't in my opinion normal behavior, which is why I'd have been the a.shole to call the 800 number at the time. Just witnessing a picture, and not the entire situation makes it more difficult to guage what I'd be complaining about though. > >This case sounds like they did something that was MFFY compared with > >those times. Being delayed by 20 seconds isn't a big deal, but if I [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > Anyone who got pissed was fully justified. Oh, hell yeah. As I said, I have plenty of cell phone minutes to use, so I wouldn't have hesitated to be the one who called their bosses about it first. Dave >> >> I was not impacted by the asinine parking job, so who would I have >> >> called? The picture was a lot more useful to me as a talking point for [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > >It'd help prevent the problem if they knew about it. Easy enough to print out the photo and a copy of this thread and snail it to the CEO of the company. >> >How many other people saw it >> >too? How many of them thought, "those f.cking pricks" but did nothing? [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > >Kitty was stabbed to death in front of at least 38 witnesses Are you seriously attempting to equate poor parking with murder? >That's usually been the situation, or at my office the neighbors have >blocked me in a few times. Once was a delivery truck that was >illegally parked, and he gave me a huge apology about running late and >just neededing to get the sh.t unloaded, but still it was under 60 >seconds I had to wait before he was out of my way. I don't consider those IBJAM situations to be "necessary." Double-parking because there are no "close" spaces and you're "in a hurry" and "I'll be just a minute" does not justify blocking someone in. Like the bimbo at the Blockbuster Video who ignored several vaild parking spaces and instead parallel-parked behind my car and two others while she ran up to the night drop to return her videotapes. I happened to be walking out of the store at the time and saw her pull up and exit her vehicle; I said "would you mind moving your car? I need to get out." Her response was to raise her hand which held her tapes and shake it, as if to say "I'll be just a minute while I drop off these tapes" - as if that were some sort of excuse. The angry expression on her face, as well as the strip of rubber she laid down as she pulled away, suggested to me that she felt that *I* was somehow infringing on her rights. >> These guys were just plain MFFY - they ignored a large, empty parking >> lot with plenty of space BEHIND the building and chose instead to [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >normal behavior, which is why I'd have been the a.shole to call the 800 >number at the time. I figued the guys in the truck and the guy in the Dodge sedan were already burning up the phone lines to that company. "Scott en Aztlán" <scottenaztlan@yahooNOSPAM.com> wrote in message > If that had been my pickup truck, those muscle-heads would have > returned to find a huge hole in the side of their delivery truck, > directly across from the empty parking spot where my pickup truck used > to be parked. How? >> If that had been my pickup truck, those muscle-heads would have >> returned to find a huge hole in the side of their delivery truck, >> directly across from the empty parking spot where my pickup truck used >> to be parked. > >How? By backing the pickup truck up until the bumper was poking through the side wall of the a.sholes' truck. Maybe it wouldn't have made a hole, but it would certainly have left a big dent... "Scott en Aztlán" <scottenaztlan@yahooNOSPAM.com> wrote in message >>How? > > By backing the pickup truck up until the bumper was poking through the > side wall of the a.sholes' truck. Photo is not definitive, but it appears the p/u truck bumper may well be below the box wall of the truck. In that case, all you'd accomplish would be to do some serious body damage to your own truck bed and possibly dent the side of the box van, [although that's unlikely, since you'd be impacting right at the reinforced floor level.] which probably wouldn't impede his business use of the vehicle at all, while you'd have a hefty repair bill to deal with, assuming you forego insurance fraud. And we still have not addressed how you would get your truck out of the parking spot after wreaking all this havoc. Similarly destroy the car parked opposite you, and drive out over the smoldering wreckage? That would fall pretty much in line with your attitudes displayed here -- the ultimate MFFY. >"Scott en Aztlán" <scottenaztlan@yahooNOSPAM.com> wrote in message >>> [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >Photo is not definitive, but it appears the p/u truck bumper may well be >below the box wall of the truck. You could very well be right. Consider my statement amended accoredingly. ;) >And we still have not >addressed how you would get your truck out of the parking spot after >wreaking all this havoc. Hopefully bashing in the side of his van would give me just enough clearance to escape. Of course, I would make a careful assessment of the situation beforehand; if, as you suiggest, the bumper of my truck was too low, or I needed more than a few inches of clearance to escape, I would not have made the attempt. But this is all moot to begin with, as I would never drive any of my vehicles to this particular parking lot. I walk to this food court from my office almost every day, and I see this kind of stuff happening every single time I go there. The place is very poorly designed; not only are there too few spaces in front, but there are two fast food joints with drive-through lanes that one enters from the same parking lot. You can imagine the chaos. Bottom line, if I had to drive somewhere to have lunch, it would NOT be this food court. >Similarly destroy the car parked opposite you, and >drive out over the smoldering wreckage? Absolutely not - I would never cause damage to innocent drivers' vehicles. That would be unconscionable. >That would fall pretty much in line >with your attitudes displayed here -- the ultimate MFFY. Huh? You think *I* am a MFFY? How can you possibly justify such a statement? "Scott en Aztlán" <scottenaztlan@yahooNOSPAM.com> wrote in message > Huh? You think *I* am a MFFY? How can you possibly justify such a > statement? Because most of your posts, iirc, seem to involve complaints about other drivers who actually or potentially cause you inconvenience or delay. >> Huh? You think *I* am a MFFY? How can you possibly justify such a >> statement? > >Because most of your posts, iirc, seem to involve complaints about other >drivers who actually or potentially cause you inconvenience or delay. It sounds like you're a little unclear on the concept. >>>Huh? You think *I* am a MFFY? How can you possibly justify such a >>>statement? >>Because most of your posts, iirc, seem to involve complaints about other >>drivers who actually or potentially cause you inconvenience or delay. > It sounds like you're a little unclear on the concept. I've noticed that most MFFYs are unclear on the concept. It's the people who aren't MFFYs who understand what you're referring to. "Arif Khokar" <akhokar1234@wvu.edu> wrote in message news:w1rpf.1634 > I've noticed that most MFFYs are unclear on the concept. It's the people > who aren't MFFYs who understand what you're referring to. Now there's some resounding logic. "If they disagree with us, that proves they're wrong." Hoo-boy!! > "Arif Khokar" <akhokar1234@wvu.edu> wrote in message news:w1rpf.1634 >> [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > Now there's some resounding logic. "If they disagree with us, that proves > they're wrong." Hoo-boy!! That's not what he wrote. Here's how it works, those people who engage in 'me first, f.ck you' behavior don't understand that it is anything wrong. Their sense of entitlement has been built up over the years with the concepts of "consideration" and 'just let them do it' that they don't understand what's wrong about blocking a person's car in. About blocking the isle in the parking lot, etc and so forth. To them, they are entitled to screw things up for everyone else, they think everyone else has to show them "consideration" and nobody can object, they just have to 'let them do it'. They think the person who complains about their behavior is the one in the wrong, not them, they can't be in the wrong when they've blocked traffic for 20mins, it's those a.sholes who found it an inconvience to go around the other way or just wait, they are in the wrong. Much like you don't seem to be seeing why it's wrong to do those things and appear to be blaming scott because he objects to those behaviors. "Brent P" <tetraethylleadREMOVETHIS@yahoo.com> wrote in message >> Now there's some resounding logic. "If they disagree with us, that >> proves >> they're wrong." Hoo-boy!! > > That's not what he wrote. Well, it's quite clear those are not the precise words that he wrote, but the overarching premise from you, scott, and arif is that anyone who doesn't "understand" your notion of MFFY must probably be one. This is the worst sort of self-justifying circular logic. > Here's how it works, those people who engage in > 'me first, f.ck you' behavior don't understand that it is anything wrong. > Their sense of entitlement has been built up over the years..... To them, > they are entitled > to screw things up for everyone else, they think everyone else has to > show them "consideration" ....They think the person who complains about > their behavior > is the one in the wrong, not them, High sounding sophistry indeed, but here's where your little game breaks down. You can't possibly document that these actions are intentional, or that the people who engage in these actions lack any sort of understanding; much less that they are based on some sense of entitlement. In some cases, there is surely intent, in others not; in others the drivers may simply be obliviously inept. All these types are found on our roadways, but the response from the "MFFY patrol" is the same -- aggravation at these deliberate disruptions to the traffic flow. In virtually all of the cases, the events involve one or another of you, and the response that reads through and through your posts is consistent -- look at this incompetent fool, he slowed me down --made me swerve -- blocked my lane-- doesn't accelerate briskly enough. Its all about *you* and the fact that you weren't able to drive precisely when, where, and how you wanted, which makes you guys the biggest MFFYs of all, because your posted complaints are virtually always made intentionally and knowingly about your own inconvenience, whereas the folks you're complaining about may or may not be aware of what they've done at all. There seems to be a self-centeredness about your personas that is really quite remarkable. > Much like you don't seem to be seeing why it's wrong to do those things > ..... Go back and reread my posts. Never have I said or implied any such thing. >"Brent P" <tetraethylleadREMOVETHIS@yahoo.com> wrote in message >>> [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] >"understand" your notion of MFFY must probably be one. This is the worst >sort of self-justifying circular logic. Let me give it one more try, and then I'll stop wasting my time with you. Have a look at this: http://www.geocities.com/scottenaztlan/mffy.html If, after reading that page and seeing those pictures of real MFFYs, you are sill unable to grasp the concept, then there's just no hope for you. >> Here's how it works, those people who engage in >> 'me first, f.ck you' behavior don't understand that it is anything wrong. [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >High sounding sophistry indeed, but here's where your little game breaks >down. You can't possibly document that these actions are intentional Since when is ignorance of the law an excuse? >deliberate disruptions to the traffic flow. In virtually all of the cases, >the events involve one or another of you, and the response that reads >through and through your posts is consistent -- look at this incompetent >fool, he slowed me down --made me swerve -- blocked my lane-- doesn't >accelerate briskly enough. Its all about *you* and the fact that you >weren't able to drive precisely when, where, and how you wanted Fascinating. I guess you are also unclear on the concept of advocacy. Tell me, when a cop pulls you over for blocking the passing lane, or running a red light, or making an unsafe merge, is it "all about him?" Or is it possible that cops occasionally pull people over in order to enchance the overall safety of the driving public? If a drunk driver almost collided with your car, cut you off, and forced you to slam on your brakes, and you called the police to report him, does this mean "it's all about you?" One might begin to suspect that you are being deliberately inflammatory... "Scott en Aztlán" <scottenaztlan@yahooNOSPAM.com> wrote in message > Let me give it one more try, and then I'll stop wasting my time with > you. > > Have a look at this: http://www.geocities.com/scottenaztlan/mffy.html Good Lord! You've even created a website to display your obsession? You truly need a life. Have you considered therapy? > "Scott en Aztlán" <scottenaztlan@yahooNOSPAM.com> wrote in message > > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > Good Lord! You've even created a website to display your obsession? You > truly need a life. Have you considered therapy? ----- If you think that's funny, check out: http://www.geocities.com/slothkills/ The picture of an older woman checking out the hand controls of a car equipped for a disabled driver is titled... "A Slowbird in Action". I particularly like the very first sentence on the MFFY page: "[NOTE: Yahoo is exceptionally stingy WRT bandwidth...". The first 5 words are pointing out the fault of the bandwidth he has been provided... gratis. (It's Yahoo's fault my page sucks, not mine.) Nah, it couldn't be him... it's everybody else. ----- - gpsman plonk goes another fucktard. > plonk goes another fucktard. ----- Plonk...? You couldn't counter his argument so you plonked him? That may appear an effective insult to some of the more dense among us, the rest of us recognize it as an act of extreme desperation. The plonk in this case is a retreat and surrender, no matter how you think you may have disguised it. ----- - gpsman >"Scott en Aztlán" <scottenaztlan@yahooNOSPAM.com> wrote in message >> [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >Good Lord! You've even created a website to display your obsession? You >truly need a life. Have you considered therapy? That page IS therapy - to this day I still get a good laugh out of some of those pictures... ;) "Scott en Aztlán" <scottenaztlan@yahooNOSPAM.com> wrote in message > Tell me, when a cop pulls you over..... is it "all about him?" Of course not. But you're not a cop. Invalid analogy. > If a drunk driver almost collided.... and you called the police to report > him, does this mean "it's all about you?" Well, me and several thousand others, perhaps. Better, but still not a good analogy. A drunk is out of control and must be removed. This is not the same as someone whom you perceive as inept or aggressive simply because he doesn't possess your professional driving skills, lightning-like reflexes, and infallible depth perception and speed/distance judgement. > "Brent P" <tetraethylleadREMOVETHIS@yahoo.com> wrote in message >>> [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > "understand" your notion of MFFY must probably be one. This is the worst > sort of self-justifying circular logic. Not at all. But people who think that the person complaining about the behavior is the problem is clearly showing the signs of being one. After all, they'll 'just be a minute' everyone else can deal with it. >> Here's how it works, those people who engage in >> 'me first, f.ck you' behavior don't understand that it is anything wrong. >> Their sense of entitlement has been built up over the years..... To them, >> they are entitled >> to screw things up for everyone else, they think everyone else has to >> show them "consideration" ....They think the person who complains about >> their behavior > is the one in the wrong, not them, > High sounding sophistry indeed, but here's where your little game breaks > down. You can't possibly document that these actions are intentional, or > that the people who engage in these actions lack any sort of understanding; > much less that they are based on some sense of entitlement. As I have posted before ignorance is generally followed with an act, gesture, or words of apology. 'Me First f.ck You', is followed by the finger or other such act or words. Ignorance is when the horn blast causes someone cutting you off as to pose a threat of collision to back off. MFFY is when they keep coming over and flip you off in the process. For instance, I once posted about a woman who ran a red light forcing me to slam on the brakes to avoid a collision. Her response was to flip me off with both hands. Recently I was in the outside of a double turn lane that fed into three lanes. I held my lane, she cut me off, I moved to the third lane she cut me off again. When I used my horn on the second cut off which was more difficult to avoid she flipped me off. One morning I came to an intersection where the traffic signals were turned off and stop signs were out. A pickup ran the stop sign nearly hit me, the guy started cursing me. I a left turn lane the pickup truck in front of me turns wide into the right lane, I turn into the left lane. He then veers left, cutting me off, I go right to avoid collision, he flips me off. That's 'me first f.ck you' without any doubt at all. >As I have posted before ignorance is generally followed with an act, >gesture, or words of apology. 'Me First f.ck You', is followed by the [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >pose a threat of collision to back off. MFFY is when they keep coming >over and flip you off in the process. Yep, you're touching upon the very essence of what separates assertive drivers from MFFY drivers. There's nothing wrong with being assertive and taking what is rightfully yours. The MFFY, however, takes what is YOURS, not what is HIS. Things like your turn at the four-way stop. There's nothing wrong with wanting to drive at the maximum safe speed for a given stretch of road. The MFFY, however, drives at whatever speed HE feels like - everyone else be damned. You, Kenny, myself, et. al. have a "Drive and Let Drive" attitude. MFFYs have a "I'll do what I like, regardless of the effect it has on you" attitude. The difference is obvious to any intellectually honest person. "Scott en Aztlán" <scottenaztlan@yahooNOSPAM.com> wrote in message > You, Kenny, myself, et. al. have a "Drive and Let Drive" attitude. > MFFYs have a "I'll do what I like, regardless of the effect it has on > you" attitude. Drive and let drive, huh? Then what happened to the let drive part? Anyone whose driving style doesn't quite mesh with yours incurs your wrath. Anyone who inconveniences you earns another of your acronym titles. > The difference is obvious to any intellectually honest > person. Which is likely why you can't even see the hypocrisy of your own attitudes. You guys really make a team. Your ego-centric focus is quite breathtaking. You need to get some other factors working in your life. Your whole existence seems focused on how much and how often other (incompetent) drivers aggravate you. Do you work? Do you go to school? (your language choice and profane writing style belie any education that might have tried to come your way.) Do you have a family? Maybe you need a hobby. > "Scott en Aztlán" <scottenaztlan@yahooNOSPAM.com> wrote in message >> [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > whose driving style doesn't quite mesh with yours incurs your wrath. Anyone > who inconveniences you earns another of your acronym titles. Remember the golden rule I mentioned earlier? Why do you have a problem with driving such that you don't negatively impact others? Why do you have a problem with those complaining about being negatively impacted? >> The difference is obvious to any intellectually honest >> person. > Which is likely why you can't even see the hypocrisy of your own attitudes. > You guys really make a team. Your ego-centric focus is quite breathtaking. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > choice and profane writing style belie any education that might have tried > to come your way.) Do you have a family? Maybe you need a hobby. My interest began when I moved to an area that didn't have the gridded roads and through streets in subdivisions and other residential areas that I was used to for all of my life prior to that point. This is when I started to be forced to ride arterial roads much more than I ever had been to get from point a to point b. This is when drivers with a MFFY style went from a minor annoyance when I (up to then rarely) drove to a life threatening condition when I biked. I don't know about you, but the bicycle is my favorite vehicle, most of my driving technique is from my bicycling. How I've learned that giving a inch means a driver will take a mile and how that could kill me. I was once nearly sucked under the wheels of a box truck because I had moved over for him and he decided that 3 inches was a suitible lateral gap when there was no more road to my right. I ended up crashing into the ditch, and that hurt, but at least I wasn't dead. While it may be a minor annoyance to you all wraped up in your steel cage, I'm sitting over and around a steel frame and it's my body that will take the impact. So, it's not just an annoyance to me, it's life and death. Beyond that, I've had my vehicles hit by people engaging in MFFY behaviors. The kid who crossed the center line because he couldn't be bothered to pull over and clean his windshield and had no concern what-so-ever for nearly killing me (the second time a door beam and a seat belt saved me) and doing significant damage to my car. The kid who cut me off going much slower than the posted limit and then slammed on the brakes because he was and I quote "in a hurry" and couldn't wait for me to pass by. Then there were the times I've been rear ended while waiting at traffic lights. So excuse me for being concerned about the rampant ignorance, lack of attention, and self centered behavior of MFFY type drivers and the consistant encouragement and reward for that sort of behavior. "Brent P" <tetraethylleadREMOVETHIS@yahoo.com> wrote in message >Why do you have a problem > with driving such that you don't negatively impact others? I don't have any such problem. Where did I say that? >Why do you > have a problem with those complaining about being negatively impacted? Because its a lot like kids complaining about sand in their bathing suits while playing at the beach. If you're going to drive on public roadways, you have to tolerate the public, and that means some folk who simply haven't achieved your level of perfection in operating a vehicle. Occasional complaints are normal - everyone does that. But you obsess over these things in a way that is truly unhealthy. > My interest began when I moved to an area that didn't have the gridded > roads and through streets in subdivisions and other residential areas > that I was used to for all of my life prior to that point. OK, fine. No excuse, just deal with it. I, and several million other folk, have lived entire lives driving in a northeastern city where gridded streets are virtually nonexistent. > This is when drivers with a MFFY style went from a minor annoyance when > I (up to then rarely) drove to a life threatening condition when I biked. > I > don't know about you, but the bicycle is my favorite vehicle, most of my > driving technique is from my bicycling. Key phrase here: "...most of my driving technique is from my bicycling.." That is truly frightening, but enlightening. Based on my observation of bicyclists, I now conclude that your auto driving technique incorporates abrupt, unannounced lane changes, squeezing by other traffic in the same lane if you think there's room, and disregard of traffic lights if *you* think there's time to sneak across. I now understand both 1) how you encounter so many dangerous situations, and 2) why you sincerely believe that all the fault lies with the *other* drivers. > .....nearly sucked under the wheels of a box truck....ended up crashing > into > the ditch; kid who crossed the center line....nearly killing me; kid > who cut me off...and then slammed on the brakes; rear ended while waiting > at traffic lights. You certainly do encounter a lot of situations. The only common factor in all these things is you. Do the analysis. > Key phrase here: "...most of my driving technique is from my bicycling.." > That is truly frightening, but enlightening. Based on my observation of > bicyclists, I now conclude that your auto driving technique incorporates > abrupt, unannounced lane changes, squeezing by other traffic in the same > lane if you think there's room, and disregard of traffic lights if *you* > think there's time to sneak across. You have a bad habit of making unwarranted assumptions. Try checking the google archives before you make an a.s out of yourself again. >> Key phrase here: "...most of my driving technique is from my >> bicycling.." [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > You have a bad habit of making unwarranted assumptions. Try checking > the google archives before you make an a.s out of yourself again. "Again"? I made no assumptions of any kind; I reached conclusions. Google archives are large - if you have something to point out, please be more specific. > >> Key phrase here: "...most of my driving technique is from my > >> bicycling.." [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > >> lane if you think there's room, and disregard of traffic lights if *you* > >> think there's time to sneak across. > > You have a bad habit of making unwarranted assumptions. Try checking > > the google archives before you make an a.s out of yourself again. > "Again"? I made no assumptions of any kind; I reached conclusions. You made an assumption. In order to reach a conclusion, you need data that supports it. You made no effort to gather any data (hence the reason I kindly pointed you to the Google archive). > Google archives are large Why, yes, they are. That's why you use search terms when looking for something specific. Arif Khokar wrote: <brevity snip> > > > You have a bad habit of making unwarranted assumptions. Try checking > > > the google archives before you make an a.s out of yourself again. [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > Why, yes, they are. That's why you use search terms when looking for > something specific. ----- Looks like your either stupid, have reading comprehension problems or are plumb out of argument, or all three. He reached his conclusions based on Brent's post, and he quotes Brent in the process. That's his "data", dumbass. Your definition of that procedure as "making unwarranted assumptions" and suggestion that the needed data should be available via Google if it exists couldn't *be* more stupid. When you're out of argument it's best to just STFU. ----- - gpsman > He reached his conclusions based on Brent's post, He didn't. His "conclusion" was based on assumptions, and therefore is an assumption in itself. > That's his "data", dumbass. That's not data by any stretch of the definition. > Your definition of that > procedure as "making unwarranted assumptions" Unwarranted assumptions because he did not back them up with data gleaned from Brent's archived posts on the subject under discussion. > and suggestion that the > needed data should be available via Google if it exists It does exist. I've read many posts of his in the archives over the years. > couldn't *be* more stupid. I don't see why stating the fact that posts of Brent's on the subject under discussion are available in the Google archive is "stupid," in your words. > When you're out of argument it's best to just STFU. Throwing a temper tantrum isn't going to help your argument, no matter how many times you *assume* otherwise. > Arif Khokar wrote: <brevity snip> >> Why, yes, they are. That's why you use search terms when looking for >> something specific. > He reached his conclusions based on Brent's post, and he quotes Brent > in the process. That's his "data", dumbass. Your definition of that > procedure as "making unwarranted assumptions" and suggestion that the > needed data should be available via Google if it exists couldn't *be* > more stupid. His data was the POBs (people on bicycle) he remembers seeing in his neighborhood who ride bicycles as if they were a mere toy and not subject to the vehicle code and then he assumed I ride like them. This is an incorrect view as I follow a practice known as vehicular bicycling. His data set was not applicable and his assumption failed. This best describes the way I ride: http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/ped_bike/docs/pamanual.pdf Start with chapter 2. If you prefer films, the 1954 film, "Drive your Bike" found here: http://www.humantransport.org/bicycledriving/library/movies/movies.html and at archive.org explains the concepts involved. It's aimed at children so it should be just about your speed. It's sad this stuff isn't taught in grade school any longer. They just feed kids a bunch of helmet propaganda which leads to the POB behavior that many people see and what they remember. > This best describes the way I ride: > > http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/ped_bike/docs/pamanual.pdf > > Start with chapter 2. > ----- <quote> With very few exceptions, the safest way to ride is as part of the traffic, going with the flow of the normal traffic pattern. </quote> That isn't what you describe with your tales of Sloths holding you up on your bicycle. Slower drivers are part of the "normal traffic pattern". If you rode "going with the flow of the normal traffic pattern" you'd have little, if any problem with slower drivers (especially on a *bike*). So I don't think that "best describes the way" you ride. Except everyone is speeding everywhere at all times, of course. Where in the f.ck are all these slow drivers coming from? You seem just a tad bit difficult to satisfy... or comprehend. ----- - gpsman >> This best describes the way I ride: >> [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > the traffic, going with the flow of the normal traffic pattern. ></quote> > That isn't what you describe with your tales of Sloths holding you up > on your bicycle. What deluded concept are you going by now? > Slower drivers are part of the "normal traffic pattern". They should be in the right lane, and capable of accelerating at least as well as a bicycle. > If you rode > "going with the flow of the normal traffic pattern" you'd have little, > if any problem with slower drivers (especially on a *bike*). So I don't > think that "best describes the way" you ride. Oh, you're confused as usual. You equate acceleration at a light with midblock driving. But I already explained that to you, so you must just be outright stupid. (or a troll) > Except everyone is speeding everywhere at all times, of course. Where > in the f.ck are all these slow drivers coming from? I explained this to you earlier. The drivers accelerate like 50 weight oil going uphill on a 10 below zero F day. However, they will continue to acclerate until something gets in their way. Thusly they end up speeding between lights but are very slow at intersections. Of course you won't comprehend this any better this time. > You seem just a tad bit difficult to satisfy... or comprehend. *yawn* your rutine is getting old. "Brent P" <tetraethylleadREMOVETHIS@yahoo.com> wrote in message > This best describes the way I ride: > > http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/ped_bike/docs/pamanual.pdf If you ride as described herein, then my assumption was wrong. If you do, then you will be about the *tenth* on-road bicycle rider in my lifetime that I have encountered or heard of who properly follows vehicular rules. [Caveat: a fair amount of the cyclists I see are urban messengers, possibly not representative of the whole.] > "Brent P" <tetraethylleadREMOVETHIS@yahoo.com> wrote in message >>This best describes the way I ride: >> >>http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/ped_bike/docs/pamanual.pdf > If you ride as described herein, then my assumption was wrong. Ah, so you admit it was an assumption, and, therefore, not a "conclusion." ;) "Arif Khokar" <akhokar1234@wvu.edu> wrote in message news:Sdqqf.1771 > Ah, so you admit it was an assumption, and, therefore, not a "conclusion." > ;) Just for you, Arif..... just for you. You're clearly in need of a thrill, and are so easily excited. > "Brent P" <tetraethylleadREMOVETHIS@yahoo.com> wrote in message >> [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > then you will be about the *tenth* on-road bicycle rider in my lifetime that > I have encountered or heard of who properly follows vehicular rules. Odds are you don't even notice most vehicular bicyclists unless you are stuck behind a driver who is too scared to pass one. > [Caveat: a fair amount of the cyclists I see are urban messengers, possibly > not representative of the whole.] That's like judging all car drivers by cabbies. > "Brent P" <tetraethylleadREMOVETHIS@yahoo.com> wrote in message >> >>Why do you have a problem >> with driving such that you don't negatively impact others? > I don't have any such problem. Where did I say that? It would appear you do, since you apparently don't think that is something to strive for. >>Why do you >> have a problem with those complaining about being negatively impacted? > Because its a lot like kids complaining about sand in their bathing suits > while playing at the beach. If you're going to drive on public roadways, > you have to tolerate the public, and that means some folk who simply haven't > achieved your level of perfection in operating a vehicle. Occasional > complaints are normal - everyone does that. But you obsess over these > things in a way that is truly unhealthy. The arguement of the lowest common demonator. Of no improvement, just accept stupidity and build better idiots year after year. Build the sense of entitlement by never so much as honking a horn or communicating in any fashion that the behavior is wrong. >> My interest began when I moved to an area that didn't have the gridded >> roads and through streets in subdivisions and other residential areas >> that I was used to for all of my life prior to that point. > OK, fine. No excuse, just deal with it. I, and several million other folk, > have lived entire lives driving in a northeastern city where gridded streets > are virtually nonexistent. I do deal with it. But what you apparently want is silent acceptance of it. >> This is when drivers with a MFFY style went from a minor annoyance when >> I (up to then rarely) drove to a life threatening condition when I biked. >> I >> don't know about you, but the bicycle is my favorite vehicle, most of my >> driving technique is from my bicycling. > Key phrase here: "...most of my driving technique is from my bicycling.." > That is truly frightening, but enlightening. Of course let me guess, you are going to harp on POBs.... > Based on my observation of > bicyclists, I now conclude that your auto driving technique incorporates > abrupt, unannounced lane changes, squeezing by other traffic in the same > lane if you think there's room, and disregard of traffic lights if *you* > think there's time to sneak across. Um no. I am a vehicular bicyclist. That means to the letter of the vehicle code. I've posted on this many many many times over the years. However drivers seem to have a great deal of problem with it. A good number don't like waiting their turn behind me at traffic lights and try to force their way past to snuggle up to the bumper of the car in front of me. I find 2-3 a year like that alone. > I now understand both 1) how you > encounter so many dangerous situations, and 2) why you sincerely believe > that all the fault lies with the *other* drivers. You're so full of sh.t. My guess is that you are just another driver who expects everyone else to compensate for him. >> .....nearly sucked under the wheels of a box truck....ended up crashing >> into >> the ditch; kid who crossed the center line....nearly killing me; kid >> who cut me off...and then slammed on the brakes; rear ended while waiting >> at traffic lights. > You certainly do encounter a lot of situations. The only common factor in > all these things is you. Do the analysis. I see a lot of traffic. You can only hope someone cross the center line and give you the choice between being sideswiped and going into the ditch and hitting a big tree. Or that someone just doesn't plow into the back of your car while you are waiting at a traffic light. "Brent P" <tetraethylleadREMOVETHIS@yahoo.com> wrote in message >> I don't have any such problem. Where did I say that? > > It would appear you do, since you apparently don't think that is > something to strive for. Please cite references. All my posts are still available. You really must learn to read more carefully. >> If you're going to drive on public roadways, >> you have to tolerate the public, and that means some folk who simply >> haven't >> achieved your level of perfection in operating a vehicle. > > The arguement of the lowest common demonator. No, not at all. An accurate characterization would be to call it the argument of the bell curve. There will always be a few very good drivers, a few very bad drivers, and a whole truckload of eminently average drivers in the middle. < cut out puerile insults...> > I see a lot of traffic. > > You can only hope someone cross the center line ..... Brent, I drive 6000 miles per month in a professional capacity. I train other drivers for my company. Neither I nor anyone I know encounters as many hair-raising events as you and scott and a couple of others here seem to. I can only reach my own conclusion as to the cause of this anomaly. > "Brent P" <tetraethylleadREMOVETHIS@yahoo.com> wrote in message >> >>> I don't have any such problem. Where did I say that? >> >> It would appear you do, since you apparently don't think that is >> something to strive for. > Please cite references. All my posts are still available. You really must > learn to read more carefully. Well what exactly are you arguing for then? Because it seems you shouldn't have any beef with, Scott, myself, or any one else that believes in that golden rule then. But yet, you do. So what's the problem? >>> If you're going to drive on public roadways, >>> you have to tolerate the public, and that means some folk who simply >>> haven't achieved your level of perfection in operating a vehicle. >> The arguement of the lowest common demonator. > No, not at all. An accurate characterization would be to call it the > argument of the bell curve. There will always be a few very good drivers, a > few very bad drivers, and a whole truckload of eminently average drivers in > the middle. Yet you find any action to communicate to the bottom end of that bell curve that they are doing wrong to be wrong in and of itself. That we should tolerate them without a peep. All that does is reinforce that they aren't doing anything wrong and demonstrate to other people that they can behave in the same self centered way and nobody will complain. This in turn lowers the bar. You are arguing for the lowest common demonator when you call for infinite tolerance of self serving, lazy stupidity. >< cut out puerile insults...> Translation: you are embarassed about your false assumptions. >> I see a lot of traffic. >> You can only hope someone cross the center line ..... > Brent, I drive 6000 miles per month in a professional capacity. Wooptie do. > I train other drivers for my company. In something big I suppose. > Neither I nor anyone I know encounters as > many hair-raising events as you and scott and a couple of others here seem > to. I can only reach my own conclusion as to the cause of this anomaly. Professional drivers are usually chock full of stories of what 'four-wheelers' have done around them. I'll tell you what happened today. I am going along in the left lane of a four lane road behind another driver. A van gets on my rear bumper just before a red signal and we all stop. The light goes green and the vehicle in front of me accelerates at a reasonable pace, but not all that swiftly. Of course the van is on my a.s. Having been faster than the truck in the right lane, I move over to the right, since it's obvious the van driver is going to continue to be on my a.s unless I do. (he made no effort, signal, or move to change lanes) The van driver sucks up to the bumper of the vehicle I had been behind. I am moving slightly faster in the right lane, so guess what, the van driver changes lanes and is once again on my a.s. I decide to remain ~1mph below the posted limit. The van driver gets closer then moves back into the left lane. I return to the normal speed of traffic and pass the vehicle on my left and move into the left lane. The van driver changes lanes and is coming down the right lane, pulls up next to me at the next light and flips me off. So, what did I do so illegal or even against common advice mr. professional who never has any incidents? This is the road environment in which I drive and ride. I have been physically attacked when I am on bicycle for merely being on the road. I've had drivers come across the center line and aim at me for no reason but their own amusement. I'd love to hear you explain how that's my fault, mr. professional. Oh, and while we are talking about professional drivers, how is it that when I choose to drive the speed limit on an interstate or the weather is poor, there is almost always some professional driver in a big rig who decides that less than 5 feet is a suitable following distance? And that one is not just me either since I see semi truck drivers rutinely following drivers of passenger vehicles between 3 foot and one car length. What sort of training do you folks give them anyway? "Brent P" <tetraethylleadREMOVETHIS@yahoo.com> wrote in message > Well what exactly are you arguing for then? ......So what's the > problem? There's nothing wrong with being frustrated. Everyone gets frustrated in traffic. Its the nature of the beast. The problem is this endless stream of daily stories about this stupid bitch doing this to me, or that a.shole doing that to me, etc., etc. Problem 1) I don't believe that just a few people can have so regular a stream of traffic incidents. You guys are either very inattentive drivers, or you're just making this stuff up. Problem 2) A steady stream of anecdotes pointing out the ineptitude of others is naught more than a thinly veiled shout for attention -- look at me! see how great I am! all these other sloths are jerks, but i'm better than all of them! I've been in the transportation industry for over 30 years, and one thing I've learned is that those who make a point of telling you how good they are, usually aren't. >>> I see a lot of traffic. >>> You can only hope someone cross the center line ..... > >> Brent, I drive 6000 miles per month in a professional capacity. > > Wooptie do. Mature response. That's good. >> I train other drivers for my company. > > In something big I suppose. Unwarranted assumption. Where's Arif -- doesn't he monitor these things? >> Neither I nor anyone I know encounters as >> many hair-raising events as you and scott and a couple of others here [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > Professional drivers are usually chock full of stories of what > 'four-wheelers' have done around them. Possibly true, but irrelevant to my comment. > I'll tell you what happened today. I am going along in the left lane of > a four lane road behind another driver. A van gets on my rear bumper <snip> > ....The van driver changes lanes and > is coming down the right lane, pulls up next to me at the next light and > flips me off. > > So, what did I do so illegal or even against common advice mr. > professional who never has any incidents? Nothing illegal, so far as I can tell, but he flipped you off because you were f.cking with him. That's easy to see. I don't advocate that response, but that's my analysis. He was clearly in a rush (no judgement as to why, or on his methods - irrelevant to your question) You said you moved to the right to pass vehicle 1 in front of you, and then when van moved over behind you you deliberately held your speed down. When van moved back left, you sped up and passed #1 on the right.. You were f.cking with him, and he flipped you off. That is easy to see. Now- question: how does your handling of this van driver mesh with your earlier exhortation on driving such that you don't negatively impact others? > This is the road environment in which I drive and ride. I have been > physically attacked when I am on bicycle for merely being on the road. > I've had drivers come across the center line and aim at me for no reason > but their own amusement. I'd love to hear you explain how that's my > fault, mr. professional. I have no explanation for it, but I would suggest that if it happens regularly to you, but doesn't seem to happen to others very much, you might want to analyze what you may be doing that seems to piss people off. > Oh, and while we are talking about professional drivers, how is it that > when I choose to drive the speed limit on an interstate or the weather is > poor, there is almost always some professional driver in a big rig who > decides that less than 5 feet is a suitable following distance? I don't know the answer to that. > What sort of training do you folks give them anyway? I don't know what you're talking about. Was that another unwarranted assumption? > Problem 1) I don't believe that just a few > people can have so regular a stream of traffic incidents. You want to ride along? I'll extend you the same invite I do to anyone who doesn't believe me. Of course if it's bicycling, you better be able to do 30mph on flat ground because I'm not slowing up for you. > You guys are > either very inattentive drivers, or you're just making this stuff up. I'm extreme attentive, that's why I notice it all. > Problem 2) A steady stream of anecdotes pointing out the ineptitude of > others is naught more than a thinly veiled shout for attention -- look at > me! Why the hell would I want attention for? >>> Brent, I drive 6000 miles per month in a professional capacity. >> Wooptie do. > Mature response. That's good. You're the one trying for a pissing contest. >>> I train other drivers for my company. >> In something big I suppose. > Unwarranted assumption. Where's Arif -- doesn't he monitor these things? Because it's normally truckers who do that rutine... why be so mysterous? >> I'll tell you what happened today. I am going along in the left lane of >> a four lane road behind another driver. A van gets on my rear bumper [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > Nothing illegal, so far as I can tell, but he flipped you off because you > were f.cking with him. That's easy to see. He was f.cking with me. He created a condition where I had to slow. Of course you don't see that way, you see it as not being a compliant person who allows himself to be pushed around. > I don't advocate that response, > but that's my analysis. He was clearly in a rush (no judgement as to why, > or on his methods - irrelevant to your question) You said you moved to the > right to pass vehicle 1 in front of you No, I said I moved to the right so he would no longer be on my a.s. Once in the right lane I was only moving slightly faster (about 2mph) faster than the driver in the left lane. The right lane becomes right turn only further up, and if I hadn't had a van 2 feet off my rear bumper I would have remained in the left lane. > and then when van moved over behind > you you deliberately held your speed down. To ever so slightly below the limit. It's the RIGHT lane. I have no obligation and now had no other way to keep him off my a.s other than to accelerate rapidly and be subject to ticketing by the cops. So you think I should have driven 60mph in a 40mph zone to satisify this van driver and be safe? > When van moved back left, you > sped up and passed #1 on the right.. To the normal speed of traffic because I was going straight and that was the only way I could change lanes. If the van driver had not been tailgating me, there would have never been any issue of any kind. > You were f.cking with him, and he > flipped you off. That is easy to see. Now- question: how does your > handling of this van driver mesh with your earlier exhortation on driving > such that you don't negatively impact others? He was driving in a manner that negatively impacted me, I could have cared less about him until he sucked up to the rear bumper of my car. At that point, all I wanted was him off my bumper. But thanks to speed enforcement, I couldn't use acceleration as a tool. I got out of his way initially. It's not my fault he found someone else in his way. But let me get this straight, you expected me to move to the right and punch the accelerator up to 60mph to satisify this guy? Yet, you also expect me to drive at or below the speed limit, but that's 'f.cking with the guy' It sounds like you just want to fault me. >> This is the road environment in which I drive and ride. I have been >> physically attacked when I am on bicycle for merely being on the road. >> I've had drivers come across the center line and aim at me for no reason >> but their own amusement. I'd love to hear you explain how that's my >> fault, mr. professional. > I have no explanation for it, but I would suggest that if it happens > regularly to you, but doesn't seem to happen to others very much, you might > want to analyze what you may be doing that seems to piss people off. Bicycling wise, many people have simply surrendered their right to use the roadway to avoid conflict. They use sidewalks and such. I find sidewalks too dangerous to ride and I ride too fast for them anyway. Not to mention it's illegal. Just following the vehicle code and using the road is enough to piss off drivers. I worked with someone who was also a vehicular bicyclist and he had just as many problems per mile on the roads around here as I did. A bicyclist I worked with recently had somewhat less problems but he would take to the sidewalk at times and most of his milage was on roads with far fewer drivers which explained the difference. Driving wise, I don't have any more problems than anyone else either. The only unusual problem is that my cars seem to be targets for teenage drivers over the last decade. I've also at times driven passively where I don't hold my ground because I figured that would scare a passenger. Guess what? They were even more scared as people tailgated, cut me off, etc and so forth. I still remember one woman I went out with... I was in a left turn lane, in the lane next to me was an F body. That lane was supposed to go straight. The light turns green and mr. f body moves to cut me off and turn LEFT. I was first in the queue BTW. There was only one recieving lane and it was a small urban intersection at the end of the ramp off the expressway. I backed off because she was in the car, and then she commented that I only let him go because she was in the car... This was the first time she had ever ridden with me. These things don't go away when I don't hold my ground, they actually happen more often if anything. Which is exactly how things go when I am bicycling. If I don't take a confident, strong position, some drivers will take that as license to run me off the road. The automobile allows me some more protection, but just appearing to be someone that can be pushed around attracts those who push. I could drive around entirely passively and have even more things to note down and post. >> Oh, and while we are talking about professional drivers, how is it that >> when I choose to drive the speed limit on an interstate or the weather is >> poor, there is almost always some professional driver in a big rig who >> decides that less than 5 feet is a suitable following distance? > I don't know the answer to that. Then obviously you drive in an entirely different environment. >> Problem 1) I don't believe that just a few >> people can have so regular a stream of traffic incidents. > >You want to ride along? I'll extend you the same invite I do to anyone >who doesn't believe me. Of course if it's bicycling, you better be able >to do 30mph on flat ground because I'm not slowing up for you. I've often thought of attaching my little webcam to my bike helmet, putting my laptop into a backpack, and recording a bike trip along the bike lanes where the pedalcyclists are always straddling the white lane spearation line (to verify that there are, indeed, debris in the bike lane). You could easily do something similar to capture the idiocy you see on your daily ride. >> You guys are >> either very inattentive drivers, or you're just making this stuff up. > >I'm extreme attentive, that's why I notice it all. And that highlights the true problem: some people are so oblivious that they DON'T notice what's happening all around them. Ironically, these oblivious drivers are also a major CAUSE of these very same incidents. "Brent P" <tetraethylleadREMOVETHIS@yahoo.com> wrote in message > You want to ride along? I think it would be fascinating to see just how a legion of incompetent morons manages to know your schedule, and place themselves all around you whenever you try to go somewhere. > I'm extreme attentive, that's why I notice it all. No one -- no one -- notices everything. If you *think* you see it all, that could explain your problem. > Why the hell would I want attention for? I just don't know, Brent, but you and scott and a couple of others here are the ones clamoring for it. Answer the question yourself. > You're the one trying for a pissing contest. Pissing contests are for kids. I was just trying to establish in context that I drive enough to have a broad cross-section of exposure to all types of drivers. Just as a guess, I'd venture that I probably drive about two or three times as much as you. Just a guess. >>> I'll te |
Enable EMail Alerts
Start New Thread
Reply to this Message