What exactly is "left lane blocking"?

Skip Elliott Bowman wrote:

>>On Wed, 30 Mar 2005 14:26:18 GMT, Arif Khokar >
>>wrote:

>>>>At 90 mph in a 65 zone, you can bet your arse and your pension that's
>>>>exactly the way it is.

>>>So you don't check more than 40 feet behind you before you pull out to
>>>pass?

> 1/4, just like I said originally. 40'? You just pulled that number out of
> your arse, didn't you Arif? Because I never wrote it.

I tried to come up with a number that could possibly allow a driver
going 25 mph faster than you to catch you off guard.

I'm not sure if my posts are not propagating, or if you've killfiled me,
but if the person is ¼th mile behind you when you start to pass, and it
*only takes 10 seconds to complete your pass,* then that person will
have to be going *90 mph faster than you are* in order to catch up to
you before you finish passing.

> I can't control what constitutes hurry for them now can I? Any more than
> they can control my lack of hurry.

No, but you can control when you change lanes. Unless you're driving
less than 10 mph on the interstate, I seriously doubt you'd get passed
by someone at a 90 mph differential.

> Like I told Arif, Scott, you forgot my original scenario. The approaching,,
> speeding car was more than or at least 1/4 mile behind me when I started my
> pass.

Ok.

> But you are right in one respect: he'll have to wait.

How long are you taking to pass?

Big Bill wrote:

> Again, this is a case of, "If you make me alter my speed, you're a
> MFFY driver. But if I make you alter yours, that's the natural order
> of things."

If you're changing lanes, merging, or pulling out from a side street,,
the MFFY designation does not apply to traffic that already has the
right of way.

Now on to Bill's inevitable nonsequitur response(s) ...

In article >,
Skip Elliott Bowman > wrote:
>"Matthew Russotto" > wrote in message
...
>> In article >,
>> Scott en Aztlán <newsgroup> wrote:
>>>
>>>Of course it's plausible: all it requires is that the MFFY not check
>>>his mirrors before changing lanes. Happens every day.
>>
>> Or they DO check their mirrors and decide to pass just because they
>> see a faster car coming up behind. Happens in light traffic all the
>> time -- one slow car with another car behind him in the right lane.
>> I'm coming up upon them from a long way away, with good visibility.
>> Just as I get a few carlengths back, car behind pulls out to pass and
>> proceeds to micropass or sit alongside.
>
>It's easy to win a debate when you introduce facts not in evidence, isn't
>it? I should try that sometime: make up stuff, fasten it to the facts with
>thumbtacks and spit, and then throw it at my opponent.

You can try it, but it won't work as well as when you introduce stuff
you didn't make up.


--
There's no such thing as a free lunch, but certain accounting practices can
result in a fully-depreciated one.

"Jim Yanik" .> wrote in message
.. .
> "Skip Elliott Bowman" > wrote in
> nk.net:
>
>> "Jim Yanik" .> wrote in message
>> .. .
>>> "Skip Elliott Bowman" > wrote in
>>> .net:
>>
>>>> I don't drive to **** off anyone. But if I'm passing someone
>>>> legally and during the pass see you roaring up from behind doing 30
>>>> mph over the speed limit, if you want to pass me then you'll just
>>>> have to wait until I'm done and move over. You don't like it,
>>>> rear-end my car. I could use the money. Lead-foot bullies aren't
>>>> worth my sweat.
>>>
>>> Ah,the manly challenge from a LLBer;"I'm here,I'm blocking you,and
>>> there's nothing you can do about it".= ME First,F-You.
>>
>> Well, I was there first, so yes.
>
> Violating STKR,which gives priority to faster traffic.

Unless it's an emergency vehicle on call, I don't have to yield to drivers
who are moving significantly faster than surrounding traffic; i.e. 15 mph or
more. If there's a law that says otherwise, please cite. And STKR doesn't
apply to blatant speeders, it applies to LLBs.

>>And tshere's naught you can do about
>> it, so you're right there.
>
> In some states,you could get a ticket.

Please, Jim. Have you ever known a driver in the uSA to get a ticket for
forcing a blatant lead-foot to wait until that driver's pass is completed?
Or for being an LLB, for that matter? Please.

>> But where you're wrong is by telling me to
>> get out of your way even though I was there first and you're speeding
>> like a maniac.
>
> STKR makes no mention of speed limits.Besides what you consider "speeding
> like a maniac" may be just your inability to cope with faster traffic.

Oh I can cope with traffic just fine, including lead-foots. You're right,
though, that STKR doesn't mention speed limits. It refers to the basic
rule.

>> Remember the original scenario: you're moving quite a
>> bit faster than surrounding traffic, like 20+ mph, and I had already
>> started my pass.
>
> Even though you should have waited and allowed faster traffic to pass by.
> IOW,NOT following STKR.

If they're 1/4 mile back and I'm already passing, then they can wait. I'm
not a micro-passer; most of my freeway passes are completed within 10
seconds. If the lead-foot can't wait that long, then he has a problem. And
his problems aren't mine.

>> I mean, other than rear-ending me, what can you do except rant and
>> rave?
>>
>>> A wanna-be cop.
>>
>> Hardly. Just not intimidated by lead-foot bullies is all.

> It's not bullying to expect others to follow the rules of the road.
> "Me First" is not one of them. STKR is.

Again, Jim, under your interpretation of STKR, no one but you may ever use
the passing lane.

"Jim Yanik" .> wrote in message
.. .

> Maybe he's an old fart and no longer has the reflexes to drive at
> speed,and
> compensates with stubbornness.

You're older than me, Jim. But if someone is trying to push me into doing
something dangerous that I don't want to do, you can bet dollars to donuts
I'm stubborn. Tell me you aren't the same.

"Arif Khokar" > wrote in message
...
> Skip Elliott Bowman wrote:

> I'm not sure if my posts are not propagating, or if you've killfiled me,

Never! I like your posts, Arif.

> but if the person is ¼th mile behind you when you start to pass, and it
> *only takes 10 seconds to complete your pass,* then that person will have
> to be going *90 mph faster than you are* in order to catch up to you
> before you finish passing.

I'll accept your numbers. They do support my argument, even if my own math
was fuzzy.

>> I can't control what constitutes hurry for them now can I? Any more than
>> they can control my lack of hurry.
>
> No, but you can control when you change lanes. Unless you're driving less
> than 10 mph on the interstate, I seriously doubt you'd get passed by
> someone at a 90 mph differential.

True.

>> Like I told Arif, Scott, you forgot my original scenario. The
>> approaching,, speeding car was more than or at least 1/4 mile behind me
>> when I started my pass.
>
> Ok.
>
>> But you are right in one respect: he'll have to wait.
>
> How long are you taking to pass?

I'll time it a few times and get back to you on that. But I'm estimating
ten seconds.

"Arif Khokar" > wrote in message
...
> Skip Elliott Bowman wrote:

> I'm not sure if my posts are not propagating, or if you've killfiled me,

Never! I like your posts, Arif.

> but if the person is ¼th mile behind you when you start to pass, and it
> *only takes 10 seconds to complete your pass,* then that person will have
> to be going *90 mph faster than you are* in order to catch up to you
> before you finish passing.

I'll accept your numbers. They do support my argument, even if my own math
was fuzzy.

>> I can't control what constitutes hurry for them now can I? Any more than
>> they can control my lack of hurry.
>
> No, but you can control when you change lanes. Unless you're driving less
> than 10 mph on the interstate, I seriously doubt you'd get passed by
> someone at a 90 mph differential.

True.

>> Like I told Arif, Scott, you forgot my original scenario. The
>> approaching,, speeding car was more than or at least 1/4 mile behind me
>> when I started my pass.
>
> Ok.
>
>> But you are right in one respect: he'll have to wait.
>
> How long are you taking to pass?

I'll time it a few times and get back to you on that. But I'm estimating
ten seconds.

On 30 Mar 2005 15:54:10 GMT, Jim Yanik .> wrote:

>Big Bill > wrote in
:
>
>> On 29 Mar 2005 23:05:52 GMT, Jim Yanik .> wrote:
>>
>>>Big Bill > wrote in
:
>>>
>>>> On Mon, 28 Mar 2005 22:02:53 -0500, Nate Nagel >
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>> So you're saying that I should extend courtesy to other drivers?
>>>>>> If so, prepare yourself! That's heresy!
>>>>>> If, OTOH, you're saying that if I have to yield before making a
>>>>>> maneuver that *MIGHT* affect other drivers, making them slow down or
>>>>>> change lanes (the HORROR!), I should forego the maneuver?
>>>>>
>>>>>That's exactly correct.
>>>>>
>>>>>> Get real. It's called *TRAFFIC*, and other drivers have to adjust to
>>>>>> it every time they drive.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>That doesn't mean you should deliberately drive like an a-hole.
>>>>>
>>>>>nate
>>>>
>>>> So you think I should go out of my way (even MILES out of my way), so
>>>> you can have a slightly easier drive?
>>>Hyperbole.
>>>
>>>> Is lifting off the gas pedal that much of a strain?
>>>
>>>If waiting until faster traffic has passed any more of a strain?
>>
>> If it means going out of my way, yes. Far moreso than slowing down a
>> little.
>
>Please explain how waiting to pass a slower vehicle makes you go "out of
>your way,MILES out of your way".Are you intending to pass then cut over to
>make an approaching exit?

We aren't talking about only passing here; there are also left turns.
>
>This sounds like hyperbole.
>
>>>
>>>> Are you rteally that important?
>>>> Get over yourself; everybody isn't driving just to **** you off.
>>>>
>>>
>>>No,they're just driving clueless.
>>>Can't follow something simple as STKR.
>>
>> This has nothing to do with STKR; instead, it's "I'm important; don't
>> make me slow down or change lanes. It's just too much like work. I'm
>> above that whole 'traffic' thing."
>>
>
>No,STKR gives faster vehicles priority in passing,by requiring that "slower
>traffic keep right".Attempting to exclude yourself from that by whatever
>lame "situations" you dream up is simply MFFY behavior.

Slower than what? Passing traffic, or passed traffic?
It's not defined.
Of course, you and I can just say, "Whatever gets me where I'm going
faster", but that truly is MFFY driving.

--
Bill Funk
Change "g" to "a"

On 30 Mar 2005 16:03:52 GMT, Jim Yanik .> wrote:

>Big Bill > wrote in
>news >
>> On Wed, 30 Mar 2005 14:30:17 GMT, Arif Khokar >
>> wrote:
>>
>>>Skip Elliott Bowman wrote:
>>>> "Jim Yanik" .> wrote:
>>>
>>>>>Ah,the manly challenge from a LLBer;"I'm here,I'm blocking you,and
>>>>>there's nothing you can do about it".= ME First,F-You.
>>>
>>>> Well, I was there first, so yes. And tshere's naught you can do
>>>> about it, so you're right there. But where you're wrong is by
>>>> telling me to get out of your way even though I was there first and
>>>> you're speeding like a maniac. Remember the original scenario:
>>>> you're moving quite a bit faster than surrounding traffic, like 20+
>>>> mph, and I had already started my pass.
>>>
>>>Your scenario is not grounded in reality. I have already shown that,
>>>with a reasonable amount of visibility for 60+ mph speeds, there is no
>>>possible way that you would not see a car moving 20 mph faster than
>>>you before you started your pass.
>>>
>>>Therefore, unless the car is moving more than 45 mph faster than you,
>>>it's not plausible for you to have already started your pass prior to
>>>seeing them.
>>
>> Again, this is a case of, "If you make me alter my speed, you're a
>> MFFY driver. But if I make you alter yours, that's the natural order
>> of things."
>>
>
>No,because STKR clearly gives FASTER traffic priority in passing over
>slower.

Faster than what? Passing traffic, or passed traffic?
It's undefined.
>
>*Violating* STKR is MFFY behavior.
See above.
--
Bill Funk
Change "g" to "a"

On 30 Mar 2005 16:06:14 GMT, Jim Yanik .> wrote:

>Big Bill > wrote in
>news >
>> On Wed, 30 Mar 2005 14:30:17 GMT, Arif Khokar >
>> wrote:
>>
>>>Skip Elliott Bowman wrote:
>>>> "Jim Yanik" .> wrote:
>>>
>>>>>Ah,the manly challenge from a LLBer;"I'm here,I'm blocking you,and
>>>>>there's nothing you can do about it".= ME First,F-You.
>>>
>>>> Well, I was there first, so yes. And tshere's naught you can do
>>>> about it, so you're right there. But where you're wrong is by
>>>> telling me to get out of your way even though I was there first and
>>>> you're speeding like a maniac. Remember the original scenario:
>>>> you're moving quite a bit faster than surrounding traffic, like 20+
>>>> mph, and I had already started my pass.
>>>
>>>Your scenario is not grounded in reality. I have already shown that,
>>>with a reasonable amount of visibility for 60+ mph speeds, there is no
>>>possible way that you would not see a car moving 20 mph faster than
>>>you before you started your pass.
>>>
>>>Therefore, unless the car is moving more than 45 mph faster than you,
>>>it's not plausible for you to have already started your pass prior to
>>>seeing them.
>>
>> Again, this is a case of, "If you make me alter my speed, you're a
>> MFFY driver. But if I make you alter yours, that's the natural order
>> of things."
>>
>
>No,because STKR clearly gives FASTER traffic priority in passing over
>slower.

I don't think so. I think "slower" is undefined.
>
>*Violating* STKR by making faster traffic slow because slower traffic will
>not yield is breaking the rules;putting you in the wrong,thus MFFY
>behavior.

You're really getting good at defining yourself as a MFFY driver.
You want everyone else to obey rules while you blatently violate them.
True MFFY driving.
--
Bill Funk
Change "g" to "a"