🚀 go-pugleaf

grimrod@mindless.moc (Brandon Sommerville) wrote:
>That's good to hear, but it makes no sense to block a faster vehicle
>if you can safely yield the lane.

Ofr course, this is the same brandywhine who crys abotu being
tailgated. 
Looks like some pot and kettle action here, folks.

RP
>Rahul Dhesi wrote:

>>In <35a61eb9.52262784@news.v-wave.com> grimrod@mindless.moc (Brandon
>>Sommerville) writes:

>>>Perhaps, so why not close up to a two second differential?
>>
>>Two seconds is barely safe.  I much prefer three.  I do close to a
>>three-second distance, but I don't feel obliged to do that by revving up
>>the engine and screeching my tires.  

>Two seconds is a lot of space around here.  I find that with watching
>the vehicles in front of the guy in front of me, one and a half is
>plenty.  More than that and the space gets quickly filled up.  If you
>can screech your tires at highway speeds by accelerating, that must be
>one hell of a car you're driving.

>>An in any case, why the following
>>distance might be longer than three seconds is a very different issue
>>from your unjustified insistence that any time I am following at 4-5
>>seconds I must merge to the right.  I think you were confusing between
>>following at a distance and going slower then the next vehicle.  You
>>didn't retract your claim, so perhaps you are still confusing the two
>>issues.  I look way ahead when I drive -- not just at the next vehicle,
>>but at the next half mile or so.

>That's good to hear, but it makes no sense to block a faster vehicle
>if you can safely yield the lane.

>>>If I let someone ahead, I now have to wait a little longer to clear
>>>the register (which I may do if they only have a few items and I have
>>>a lot), if I'm driving and let someone ahead who is traveling faster
>>>than me, I don't lose anything at all.
>>
>>Only if the capacity of the highway is infinite.

>If you say so.  I don't see how letting a faster vehicle by slows me
>down at all.  Getting held up by a lane hog definitely slows me down
>though.

>>My experience is that if I merge to the right to let a tailgater pass, I
>>incur two penalties: (a) I have to slow down and lose time; 

>If it is safe to move over, then you won't lose any time.  Worst case
>scenario you touch your brakes while the other guy passes you, then
>proceed to accelerate to your cruising pace.

>>(b) I have
>>to merge into a more-populated lane than mine and incur closer and less
>>safe following distances.  

>You don't have to stay in that lane, lane changes aren't a permanent
>state.

>>I really don't want to incur these penalties
>>for the benefit of some discourteous tailgater with more horsepower than
>>sense.  If he wants to get ahead, he needs to patiently wait at a decent
>>following distance for a time when I can merge right safely and without
>>slowing down.  

>And if he isn't tailgating?  How much space do you require for a safe
>lane change?

>>He is always welcome to merge right himself and slow
>>down, if he really thinks that's such a wonderful thing.  

>That makes no sense at all.  He isn't asking you to slow down, he's
>asking you to let him go by so he can travel at his chosen speed.

>>I'm not
>>willing to subscribe to the lop-sided double-standard that you seem to
>>be advocating, under which tailgating gets you more privileges on the
>>highway and safe drivers get less.

>I've never advocated tailgating, but I've also never advocated
>blocking faster vehicles, which you don't seem to have a problem with.
>-- 
>Brandon

>"Spooooooooooonnnnn!"