Things that annoy you beyond reason...(Vol 4)
Discussion
227bhp said:
Who do you think he is, Juha Kankkunen?
If there's one thing which is guaranteed to get huge amounts of abuse, gestures, light flashing and general arm waving it's overtaking someone in the snow.
I love it
Last time I overtook someone in the snow I watched behind as they crashed into a kerb.... If there's one thing which is guaranteed to get huge amounts of abuse, gestures, light flashing and general arm waving it's overtaking someone in the snow.
I love it
'Secret Sweety-munchers' annoy me beyond reason.
One in our house last night. You know the sort - open the drawer where the sweeties are kept, sneak a handful from the packet, and swiftly close the drawer before anyone notices.
But I did notice. Caught 'em in the act, in fact. One chewy mint was dropped in the drawer in the haste to 'cover up' the 'incident'.
So I says "are you not going to fish that sweety out of the bottom of the drawer then?"
No answer, just a blank look. So I explained that the game was up. No point in denying the secret squirrel act, the cat was well and truly out of the bag on that score, but it would be nice if they'd recover the spilled mint so that it didn't turn into a sticky mess at the bottom of the drawer.
Still a blank look, so I took a few things out to get it myself. Only to find two gloopy Jelly Babies, a Starburst oozing from it's paper wrapper, and a slack handful of Jelly Tots stuck to the back corner of the drawer and the cover of a recipe book. Grrrr! I've no problem with people eating sweeties, but FFS decant them into a ramekin or a bowl, or just take the packet out of the drawer and eat them openly. Then I'll not have to clean up your disgusting gloopy confectionery-based mess whenever I want to get the ingredients together for a nice dinner...
One in our house last night. You know the sort - open the drawer where the sweeties are kept, sneak a handful from the packet, and swiftly close the drawer before anyone notices.
But I did notice. Caught 'em in the act, in fact. One chewy mint was dropped in the drawer in the haste to 'cover up' the 'incident'.
So I says "are you not going to fish that sweety out of the bottom of the drawer then?"
No answer, just a blank look. So I explained that the game was up. No point in denying the secret squirrel act, the cat was well and truly out of the bag on that score, but it would be nice if they'd recover the spilled mint so that it didn't turn into a sticky mess at the bottom of the drawer.
Still a blank look, so I took a few things out to get it myself. Only to find two gloopy Jelly Babies, a Starburst oozing from it's paper wrapper, and a slack handful of Jelly Tots stuck to the back corner of the drawer and the cover of a recipe book. Grrrr! I've no problem with people eating sweeties, but FFS decant them into a ramekin or a bowl, or just take the packet out of the drawer and eat them openly. Then I'll not have to clean up your disgusting gloopy confectionery-based mess whenever I want to get the ingredients together for a nice dinner...
Fastdruid said:
It was the reason I overtook them as I could see it coming from the way they were driving.
Without the specifics (which can obviously change the decision from bad to good), you're saying you saw someone driving badly, and likely to lose control. Then decided you'd sooner be in a position, where if they lose control, they could be heading towards you, out of control. Rather than stay in a position where a loss of control would see them move away from you.As a rule of thumb, I have to say it doesn't sound like a great idea.
Munter said:
decided you'd sooner be in a position, where if they lose control, they could be heading towards you, out of control. Rather than stay in a position where a loss of control would see them move away from you.
Indeed. If I have someone up my chuff driving erratically, I tend to let them past on the grounds that I would rather have them in front of me where I can keep an eye on them and be in more control of the situation, than them behind me. So, likewise, I wouldn't overtake someone driving erratically and put them behind me, unless it was clear that I could put a lot of distance (and preferably a vehicle or two) between me and them in doing so.
Munter said:
Fastdruid said:
It was the reason I overtook them as I could see it coming from the way they were driving.
Without the specifics (which can obviously change the decision from bad to good), you're saying you saw someone driving badly, and likely to lose control. Then decided you'd sooner be in a position, where if they lose control, they could be heading towards you, out of control. Rather than stay in a position where a loss of control would see them move away from you.As a rule of thumb, I have to say it doesn't sound like a great idea.
They were constantly braking rather than holding a steady speed which is not a good idea and was IMO likely to see them lose control (which they then did after I passed them).
I thought that the chances of then crashing into me after I'd passed were far lower than them crashing and me then either crashing into them (despite snow socks and leaving a massive gap), them blocking the road or even my having to brake when I didn't want to causing me to crash independently of them[1].
[1] Snow socks are great but with them only on the front the rear is somewhat "loose", with room this can easily be controlled with a bit of power (entertainingly so) but down hill braking is exceedingly scary and could cause the back end to swing round and cause a crash.
Fastdruid said:
Dr Murdoch said:
Fastdruid said:
Last time I overtook someone in the snow I watched behind as they crashed into a kerb....
How nice.
The seemingly unstoppable rise in the reporting of increasingly publically affecting deaths.
"The death of the person who didn't end up getting on the flight that killed Buddy Holly."
That is not newsworthy.
No disrespect meant, but if that's the individual's claim to fame and has only been mentioned upon the person's death, then it isn't.
So please, dear ever-respect-reducing British press, desist. Leave the families to grieve in peace.
"The death of the person who didn't end up getting on the flight that killed Buddy Holly."
That is not newsworthy.
No disrespect meant, but if that's the individual's claim to fame and has only been mentioned upon the person's death, then it isn't.
So please, dear ever-respect-reducing British press, desist. Leave the families to grieve in peace.
CC07 PEU said:
.... LinkedIn....
But that's always been a basket of s
tslush. I begrudgingly use it as it does help me build my networking and help me with my interpersonal skill - I've just learned something new today which is useful. But, really, it's a form of self-harm logging into that site... grrr.Warning this post may contain Brexit.
People who voted to stay in the EU who call those who voted to leave "thick" or "unintelligent" just because they didn't vote their way. Who then proclaim they do not feel British, but feel European and they will always want to stay European. Since we aren't leaving Europe it shows just who the thick unintelligent ones really are.
People who voted to stay in the EU who call those who voted to leave "thick" or "unintelligent" just because they didn't vote their way. Who then proclaim they do not feel British, but feel European and they will always want to stay European. Since we aren't leaving Europe it shows just who the thick unintelligent ones really are.
R E S T E C P said:
Pamoothican said:
People who drive at 14.5mph because there is 12mm of snow on the path, the roads are clear, been gritted and its 3 degrees (not the singing trio) above freezing.
If it's so safe, overtake.Gassing Station | The Lounge | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff