🚀 go-pugleaf

Galaxie Starliner  <galaxie@speakeasy.org> wrote:
>:)>You seem to be limiting your thoughts on this subject to situations where
>:)>you can predict what is going to happen -- where traffic flow is relatively
>:)>static.  You are only one piece of what can be an essentially random and 
>:)>highly dynamic situation.  You don't always have your lane; drivers
>around
>:)>you don't always behave in a predictable or even rational manner; and
>:)>animals and children trotting onto a roadway can introduce interesting 
>:)>forcing functions.
>:)>
>:)>I can imagine _lots_ of situations where simply "letting up on the hot 
>:)>foot" isn't going to do a damn thing and may even worsen the situation.  
>:)>Have you heard of the phrase "no-win situation"?  
>
>It sounds to me like you're grasping at straws now. are you even trying to
>aviod and accident.

I'm not grasping at straws, I'm pointing out that things can get more 
dynamic and complex than you seem to want to admit.  What in the world
do you mean by the last question (questions are supposed to end in 
question marks BTW)?  Where did you get that from?  How does it logically
progress from my pointing out that traffic situations can be more
complex than the trivial cases I've seen written about?


>An "accident" is something that is unavoidable and
>since most "accidents" are avoidable, they're not really accidents now,
>are they? 

Wow.  Tautology 101.  Very good.

Remind me about what this has to do with my assertion that there are
relatively commonsituations that are more complex and dynamic than you
allow?

>How is slowing down and letting some other asshole drive next to
>the semi going to worsen the situation? 

When slowing down and letting someone else drive next to the semi puts you
or others at more risk than driving next to the semi.  It's not that hard, 
is it?

>ya see if ya let some other idiot
>drive next to the semi, when something happens, he was the one stupid
>enough to drive right beside the semi, which is in some states illeagle,
>so he gets crunched. In my state it is "not suggested" thusly if you get
>into an accident diving next to a semi; you are at fault, thusly, it was
>not an "accident" because it was something you could have avaioded.

Thanks.  I'd have never figured that out without you.  I understand what
you are saying; try and understand what I'm saying instead of just
repeating yourself.

>:)>I will agree, however, that most accidents are preventable.  I just 
>:)>have a problem with this "I can _always_ do X, therefore Y will _never_
>:)>happen" attitude.  Murphy is alive and well, and can be found everywhere.
>:)>
>
>You can let Murphy ride in your car. i gave up on murphy a long time ago.
>And ya know what, I stopped getting into "accidents." Stop accepting that
>"anything that can go wrong, will and at the worst possible time" and
>start living to aviod what can go wrong. You have a choice you can keep
>being passive and letting the world go on around you. Or you can join it.

Oh gawd.  Spare me the banal aphorisms.