One single thing that makes you think "knob" Vol 3

[ManOpener]

ShaunTheSheep said:

I think you need a frank reappraisal of exactly how you were inconvenienced by a skinny motorbike.

Aren't you supposed to give bikes a full car's width of space on the road anyway?

To be honest, if I have to change my road position because another road user, whatever vehicle they're in, coming the opposite way is so far on my side of the road that I can't afford them a safe and reasonable passing distance without doing so, they're a knob. As is anyone who defends them.

[Iva Barchetta]

Honda Jazz doing c39mph on the M25, luckily in L1,non elderly driver didn't appear to be in "I have no power"distress.

M25 was actually moving along well,still busy but okay.

[SilverSixer]

ManOpener said:

ShaunTheSheep said:

I think you need a frank reappraisal of exactly how you were inconvenienced by a skinny motorbike.

Aren't you supposed to give bikes a full car's width of space on the road anyway?

To be honest, if I have to change my road position because another road user, whatever vehicle they're in, coming the opposite way is so far on my side of the road that I can't afford them a safe and reasonable passing distance without doing so, they're a knob. As is anyone who defends them.

Exactly. I was starting to think I was going a bit doolally.

[ShaunTheSheep]

SilverSixer said:

Exactly. I was starting to think I was going a bit doolally.

You are. You're getting bent out of shape because someone is asking you to make room. Not to slow down, nothing more arduous than a look in your near side mirror and blindspot, and if its clear, to assume correct road positioning. If you were already around a metre from the nearside, you don't even need to do a thing.

This collosal imposition on you by another road user, which results in no delay to you, and however many cars on the other side of the road getting through the next lights / junction 1 bike length sooner, is knobbish?

SilverSixer said:

Why is it knobbish of me, but it's not knobbish to be on the wrong side of the road yourself?

You're wanting to deny quicker progression of everyone else, at no cost to yourself, and you don't have a reason for it.

If someone walked between you and your friend on a pavement with plenty room, would you think knob or would you think, yeah that's fair enough really, adjusting course by a metre would have been unthinkable.

[ShaunTheSheep]

ManOpener said:

if I have to change my road position because another road user, whatever vehicle they're in, coming the opposite way is so far on my side of the road that I can't afford them a safe and reasonable passing distance without doing so, they're a knob. As is anyone who defends them.

Such a knob attitude. Get out of my way plebs. This is my trajectory and I will change it only when I want to.

But at the next person turning right off the main road into a side road you'll be complaining that their crap road positioning is needlessly holding you up...

[ManOpener]

ShaunTheSheep said:

Such a knob attitude. Get out of my way plebs. This is my trajectory and I will change it only when I want to.

I'll change my trajectory or road position if I have to, based on the circumstances. To do otherwise would be thoroughly idiotic.

However, that doesn't change my view that someone causing me to do so because of a decision to intentionally drive or ride into oncoming traffic is a knob. Because they are. If you perform a manoeuvre which involves crossing a white line in such a way that another vehicle has to change their position to evade you and maintain a safe distance, then you are unequivocally a knob.

ShaunTheSheep said:

But at the next person turning right off the main road into a side road you'll be complaining that their crap road positioning is needlessly holding you up...

What the juddering fk are you on about? They're not even remotely comparable.

[ShaunTheSheep]

ManOpener said:

However, that doesn't change my view that someone causing me to do so because of a decision to intentionally drive or ride into oncoming traffic is a knob.

2 issues here - would they be a knob if they were going in the same direction as you?

E.g. a cyclist on the left of the lane you need to move out past on a very wide road so you don't need to cross the centreline for the overtake.

Or a car turning right into a side road but you can pass with enough room on the left.

I hope you say no - they're not knobs, they're just sharing the road.

So, what is the material difference with the oncoming bike?

Edit: besides the obvious unspoken shrieking rage of but but he's jumping the queue and I can't!

[ManOpener]

ShaunTheSheep said:

So, what is the material difference with the oncoming bike?

The fact they're supposed to be on my side of the road by virtue of travelling the sane direction as me?


It's almost like the highway code doesn't say

Rule 160
Once moving you should

keep to the left, unless road signs or markings indicate otherwise. The exceptions are when you want to overtake, turn right or pass parked vehicles or pedestrians in the road

And

Rule 162
Before overtaking you should make sure

the road is sufficiently clear ahead


Because if you're making vehicles coming the other way have to evade you, then the road isn't sufficiently clear ahead.


I have no idea how any competent, sane individual could think it was reasonable to force oncoming traffic to take evasive action because you're on the wrong side of the road- regardless of whether you're overtaking or not.

Edited by ManOpener on Wednesday 27th July 20:55

[ShaunTheSheep]

ManOpener said:

The fact they're supposed to be on my side of the road by virtue of travelling the sane direction as me?

That's not an answer to the question asked? I'm looking for a difference - e.g. my tyres will wear out 0.001% faster because I make a minor steering input to keep left as the road progresses.

ManOpener said:

Force oncoming traffic to take evasive action

No, if they're forcing you to brake or swerve its not on.

The case in question is there's enough room to fly a 747 up your side in street view.

You can choose to drive on the right of the lane and create a conflict, or the left if the lane and be completely unimpeded. Why should you not be expected to do the latter?

[kowalski655]

If someone DIDNT move over,and a head on occurred,who would be at fault?
M/C rider for overtaking when he didnt have enough room?

[Europa1]

3 today:

- the dribbling cretin of a rail commuter (my assumption that they are a rail commuter, as they are the usual culprits and none of the residents would be such a helmet) who parked almost opposite one of my neighbour's cars this morning, thereby rendering the street impassable to anything wider than a G-Whizz.
- the total fktrumpet of a motorcyclist who rode up to the front of the queue of traffic at the Foxton level crossing. Nothing wrong with that, until the barriers went up and they then proceeded to dribble along at 35-40mph on an A-road that has a 50 limit at that point, holding up all the traffic he had passed back at the level crossing.
- the 24-carat dildos on the dual carriageway between Royston and Baldock who happily bowl along at 70mph but then brake to 55 at the speed cameras. They are set to go off if you are above 70, you total spacktards.

[SilverSixer]

Quite remarkable that SquishedTheHedgehog doesn't recognise the difference between traffic travelling in different directions.

OK, so, he's on my side of the road on his Honda 50 and I "nudge over" to give him some room. Then the pensioner in the Volvo 960 towing a caravan who is tailgating me and who has been momentarily distracted by Doris in the passenger seat saying "Oooo look at the lovely poppies in that field, Trevor", followed by screech, smash, tinkle, squash, nee naw nee naw nee naw, knock knock, evening all, terribly sorry Mrs SquishedTheHedgehog and all the little Hedgehogs but Mr SquishedTheHedgehog is now a squished hedgehog. Please contact your insurance company.

Triffic. But it was all worth it for a chance of getting to the roundabout 30 seconds earlier.

Do it on your bike test and see if you pass.

[ShaunTheSheep]

kowalski655 said:

If someone DIDNT move over,and a head on occurred,who would be at fault?
M/C rider for overtaking when he didnt have enough room?

100% mc rider, he's on the wrong side of the road and has no priority.

[ShaunTheSheep]

SilverSixer said:

Quite remarkable that SquishedTheHedgehog doesn't recognise the difference between traffic travelling in different directions.

OK, so, he's on my side of the road on his Honda 50 and I "nudge over" to give him some room. Then the pensioner in the Volvo 960 towing a caravan who is tailgating me and who has been momentarily distracted by Doris in the passenger seat saying "Oooo look at the lovely poppies in that field, Trevor", followed by screech, smash, tinkle, squash, nee naw nee naw nee naw, knock knock, evening all, terribly sorry Mrs SquishedTheHedgehog and all the little Hedgehogs but Mr SquishedTheHedgehog is now a squished hedgehog. Please contact your insurance company.

Triffic. But it was all worth it for a chance of getting to the roundabout 30 seconds earlier.

Do it on your bike test and see if you pass.

You're inventing more and more absurd situations. The road has enough room for you to both pass unimpeded.

If Doris is giving bill a handjob, its the bikers fault for a collision.

However, back to reality.

Why should you not facilitate his progress IF it means no delay, no impact to yourself.

On your test, overtaking slow moving traffic into oncoming traffic is not a fail.

Edit: 28 secs onwards, this is fine: https://youtu.be/z-1QKVtuvHg

Edited by ShaunTheSheep on Thursday 28th July 11:37

[ManOpener]

ShaunTheSheep said:

That's not an answer to the question asked?

Yes it is. It might not be the answer to the question you think you asked but that's not really my problem. You should probably just learn to phrase your questions better.

As for the actual question you appear to be trying to ask, it's moronic. I don't need a "material" reason to brand someone breaking the highway code a knob for it and I've got no idea why you think I should.

ShaunTheSheep said:

Why should you not facilitate his progress IF it means no delay, no impact to yourself.

Nobody is suggesting that you shouldn't. Just that the person making you do so by contravening the highway code and riding at oncoming traffic with the expectation they'll just move out of you're way of is a knob.

It's not fking rocket science, is it?

ShaunTheSheep said:

Edit: 28 secs onwards, this is fine: https://youtu.be/z-1QKVtuvHg

That wouldn't be fine if it were done at 50 miles per hour, as the initial poster suggested. It's almost like you've entirely forgotten the context you're attempting to reply to.

[silentbrown]

ShaunTheSheep said:

Edit: 28 secs onwards, this is fine: https://youtu.be/z-1QKVtuvHg

I'm not a biker, so I probably don't 'get' this. Yes, the manoeuvres there are being done with appropriate caution and consideration, and the road is plenty wide enough. In fact, it's wide enough that the video could have been filmed from a car.

But a car doing the same thing would be totally unacceptable. Why is this acceptable for bikes?

I have no problem with bikes doing this, BTW, and it is a serious question.

[Liquid Knight]

silentbrown said:

I'm not a biker, so I probably don't 'get' this. Yes, the manoeuvres there are being done with appropriate caution and consideration, and the road is plenty wide enough. In fact, it's wide enough that the video could have been filmed from a car.

But a car doing the same thing would be totally unacceptable. Why is this acceptable for bikes?

I have no problem with bikes doing this, BTW, and it is a serious question.

That painted traffic island in the middle of the road with solid white lines is a Motorcycle lane. I thought everyone knew that.

[2ono]

silentbrown said:

But a car doing the same thing would be totally unacceptable. Why is this acceptable for bikes?

Because bikes are so much better than cars!

[aizvara]

Europa1 said:

- the 24-carat dildos on the dual carriageway between Royston and Baldock who happily bowl along at 70mph but then brake to 55 at the speed cameras. They are set to go off if you are above 70, you total spacktards.

Yeah, every time I drive along that bit of the A505 it reinforces my belief that many, many people are totally unaware of the speed they are travelling at and/or what the NSL sign means.

[ShaunTheSheep]

silentbrown said:

I'm not a biker, so I probably don't 'get' this. Yes, the manoeuvres there are being done with appropriate caution and consideration, and the road is plenty wide enough. In fact, it's wide enough that the video could have been filmed from a car.

But a car doing the same thing would be totally unacceptable. Why is this acceptable for bikes?

I have no problem with bikes doing this, BTW, and it is a serious question.

I think the original reasoning was to reduce traffic congestion. Strip whatever traffic you can out of queues, provided they don't then hold up other traffic.

I think the more modern interpretation is about safety. There are higher motorcyclist deaths per mile ridden in countries which require the bike is driven as you would a full size vehicle (I can't remember the exact wording in Texas). Minor rear enders happen constantly in traffic, but there's no such thing as a minor fender bender when the vehicle in front is a bike.