motorway etiquette

[Big_Spark]

A bunch of stuff from the Highway Code that is not law.

Softus, I am ending my part in this discussion now, any respect I had for you has been destroyed by your BLATANT changing of this statement to the polite version above. Originally this did not say what it says.

I am now convinced you are gutless and can simply not face apologising for silly remarks. I was not looking for an apology, but your changing of your post so long after making it, and being called on it shows you are spineless.

That is my personal opinion. You can take it how you like, but from now on I will not be responding to any post you make.

 

[Softus]

Softus, I am ending my part in this discussion now, any respect I had for you has been destroyed by your BLATANT changing of this statement to the polite version above. Originally this did not say what it says.

You're barking mad - what post do you believe that I've changed?

I am now convinced you are gutless and can simply not face apologising for silly remarks. I was not looking for an apology, but your changing of your post so long after making it, and being called on it shows you are spineless.

In your imaginary world, where there's a law against overtaking on the left, I have no doubt that I'm all the things of which you accuse me. Sadly, there is a reality that appears to be just beyond your grasp.

Post, or don't post. Reply, or don't reply. It's your choice, and it doesn't make one sub-atomic particle (geddit?) of a difference to anything.

 

[Moz]

pedantics anonymous ...lol

 

[Big_Spark]

pedantics anonymous ...lol

 

[tim west]

There must be a word for people that change their posts after the event to try winning an argument like above, but i can't think of it at the moment

 

[scott1968]

There must be a word for people that change their posts after the event to try winning an argument like above, but i can't think of it at the moment

What did they change?

 

[hermes]

" If we see any driver of a motor vehicle obviously and deliberatly passing on the left, except where this is as a result of prevailing traffic conditions, they will be stopped and either given an On the Spot penalty notice or prosecuted for a more serious offence.

If the prevailing traffic conditions include someone doing 65 in the middle lane and I am doing 70 on an empty inside lane then I would undertake.

 

[Diyisfun]

" If we see any driver of a motor vehicle obviously and deliberatly passing on the left, except where this is as a result of prevailing traffic conditions, they will be stopped and either given an On the Spot penalty notice or prosecuted for a more serious offence.

If the prevailing traffic conditions include someone doing 65 in the middle lane and I am doing 70 on an empty inside lane then I would undertake.

So would I.
Now how about m/way best part empty,
Mr KnobHead, driving 65 middle lane, nearside lane empty except for you & have been doing so for many miles at a happy 70mph. When you reach Mr Knobhead do you stay in nearside lane & pass, move behind him & flash him or go to lane 3 pass & then return to n/side. Oh & what about the glare you give him, but thats wasted as he still hasnt seen you.

 

[masona]

" If we see any driver of a motor vehicle obviously and deliberatly passing on the left, except where this is as a result of prevailing traffic conditions, they will be stopped and either given an On the Spot penalty notice or prosecuted for a more serious offence.

If the prevailing traffic conditions include someone doing 65 in the middle lane and I am doing 70 on an empty inside lane then I would undertake.

This is where it's bad driving from the middle lane, a driver should not be hogging the middle lane when the inside lane is empty.

 

[Diyisfun]

Masona..Thats the point I am making in the post above you.

 

[masona]

Doh! didn't see your post!

 

[Diyisfun]

Reassuring knowing great minds & that

 

[JohnD]

As far as I can make out, everyone hates middle-lane drivers... even other middle-lane drivers!

 

[Softus]

There must be a word for people that change their posts after the event to try winning an argument like above, but i can't think of it at the moment

The word you're looking for is "editor".

Nobody seems willing to tell me what they think it said before it was changed.

There are several reasons to think that it wasn't edited (apart from me believing that I didn't change it)...

1. When someone edits a post that isn't the very latest one, the forum software appends a note that is has been edited. There is no such note appended to the post that B_S has accused me of changing.

2. There is no comment to indicate that a moderator has sanitised my post.

3. B_S replied to the very post he later says was changed, quoting the very sentence that he later says was changed. If he quoted the sentence before I allegedly changed it, then a glance at it now would reveal the difference. If he quoted it after I changed it, then I don't understand why he waited a further half a day to accuse me of having changed it.

_____

The reality is that B_S is in a highly emotionally charged state, and is mixed up about (a) what he writes and (b) what people write to him. After all, he's just admitted to the act of reading the Highway Code and then immediately warping what it says into he wants it to say, then having to retract that assertion and apologise. Credit is due to him for being honest and apologising, but, to put it crudely, he's a bit nuts.

 

[Softus]

As far as I can make out, everyone hates middle-lane drivers... even other middle-lane drivers!

The trouble with the middle lane is that it's far too busy - this is to be expected, because the left lane is used only by old Volvos and the right lane only by new BMWs.