If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
Proof Positive You're Being MFFY'd With
Brent P wrote: > In article . com>, Harry K wrote: > > > As opposed to a MFFY (you in your own words by blocking him from > > merging), I don't have the mistaken belief that I own the space ahead > > of my vehicle. > > It is not MFFY to prevent a known obstructing driver who has demonstrated > poor planing from getting in front of you to continue obstructing and > planing poorly. > > > I will try to block anyone making any ILLEGAL maneuver > > but if they can legally do it, it is no skin off my back side. Now > > blocking some MFFY who passes a long line and tries to cut in at a > > merge, he'll wait for some one else to let him in. > > Same theory. You are not allowing someone who has demonstrated poor driving > behavior to get in front you. First you will have to show how anyione proceeding legally in the right lane is "blocking traffic". The blocker is clearly the LLB. Looks to me like Scott and the LLB are the only ones demonstrating poor driving practices...but then got forbid he should be called on it. Harry K |
Ads |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
Proof Positive You're Being MFFY'd With
Scott en Aztlán > wrote in
: > On 2 Mar 2006 01:14:41 GMT, Jim Yanik > wrote: > >>> - gpsman >> >>The LLB's primary error(blocking the passing lane) was COMPOUNDED by >>the LML's tagging alongside (making a rolling roadblock) until the >>last minute and then wanting to merge in behind the LLB,when the LML >>-should- have been looking ahead and planning ahead,and he could have >>sped up to merge ahead of the LB and not inbetween the LLB and it's >>trailing car.(reducing the safety margin for the trailing car and >>making him and everyone behind him to slow up,reducing highway >>throughput.) >> >>It's unfortunate that you can't see that in your support for MFFYs and >>their enablers. > > Now you understand how gpsman earned a permanent place in my killfile. Yes,he just made mine. -- Jim Yanik jyanik at kua.net |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Proof Positive You're Being MFFY'd With
Jim Yanik wrote: > "Harry K" > wrote in > oups.com: > > > > > Jim Yanik wrote: > > > >> > >> "legal",but not advisable,as it shows the guy was not "looking > >> ahead,thinking ahead,acting ahead". > >> IOW,he was a "last-minute Larry"(LML). > >> I wouldn't want the LML BMW merging between me and the LLB,either.It > >> cuts down my safety distance. > >> Besides,by staying alongside the LLB,the LML was negligent in leaving > >> himself another option.(besides contributing to a rolling roadblock.) > >> > >> -- > >> Jim Yanik > >> jyanik > >> at > >> kua.net > > > > Granted but the real fault is the LLB to whom Scott gave a clear pass. > > As for the LML merging between me and the LLB I resolve that simply by > > lifting my foot for a second. > > > > Harry K > > > > > > IOW,you're an ENABLER. > > -- > Jim Yanik > jyanik > at > kua.net So be it then. I have no problem being an "enabler" if you can somehow define that to mean taking no action at all. Someone wants to make a legal move I will not obstruct it. Rather that than to be a MFFY Harry K |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
Proof Positive You're Being MFFY'd With
Jim Yanik wrote: <brevity snip>
> Scott en Aztlán > wrote > > Now you understand how gpsman earned a permanent place in my killfile. > > Yes,he just made mine. ----- Ah, the killfile... first refuge of the first man to run out of argument... BuhWaHahahahaha...! <sob> I LOVE abusing dimwits via usenet... ----- - gpsman |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
Proof Positive You're Being MFFY'd With
In article .com>, Harry K wrote:
> > Brent P wrote: >> In article . com>, Harry K wrote: >> >> > As opposed to a MFFY (you in your own words by blocking him from >> > merging), I don't have the mistaken belief that I own the space ahead >> > of my vehicle. >> >> It is not MFFY to prevent a known obstructing driver who has demonstrated >> poor planing from getting in front of you to continue obstructing and >> planing poorly. >> >> > I will try to block anyone making any ILLEGAL maneuver >> > but if they can legally do it, it is no skin off my back side. Now >> > blocking some MFFY who passes a long line and tries to cut in at a >> > merge, he'll wait for some one else to let him in. >> >> Same theory. You are not allowing someone who has demonstrated poor driving >> behavior to get in front you. > > First you will have to show how anyione proceeding legally in the right > lane is "blocking traffic". The blocker is clearly the LLB. Looks to > me like Scott and the LLB are the only ones demonstrating poor driving > practices...but then got forbid he should be called on it. The driver in the right lane was going slowly and wanted to move into the left lane without turn signal at the same speed. Who knows what his final intent is. He shouldn't be let in to become a second LLB to deal with. As far as behavior goes, you're using the same logic as scott, you aren't letting someone in who isn't driving in a proper manner. IMO no signal alone is good enough.... |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
Proof Positive You're Being MFFY'd With
In article .com>, Harry K wrote:
> So be it then. I have no problem being an "enabler" if you can somehow > define that to mean taking no action at all. Someone wants to make a > legal move I will not obstruct it. Rather that than to be a MFFY Queue jumping which you say you block is technically often legal, just selfish and assholish. |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
Proof Positive You're Being MFFY'd With
Scott en Aztlán wrote: > On 1 Mar 2006 19:35:49 -0800, "Harry K" > > wrote: > > >> >> >Wierd. You blame the guy proceeding quite legally without bothering > >> >> >anyone untll he needs to change lanes, he resolves the problem by a > >> >> >legal maneuver and HE is at fault?? > >> >> > >> >> May a thousand "legal maneuvers" forever limit your speed to 50% of > >> >> the posted limit. > >> > > >> >So blame the guy who is at fault for the problem, the LLB > >> > >> The LLB is not responsible for Mr. BMW attempting to merge into an > >> already-occupied lane with no turn signal. > > > >Keep trying. You might even manage to believe your own whitewash. > > I see. So you're right, everyone else is wrong, and that's that. > Nothing anyone says is going to change *your* mind, no siree! Now that is rich!! Just WTH have you been doing? You make a mistake blaming the wrong driver and go on for days trying to justify it. I have as much aright to be stubborn as you do but the problem there is that I have admitted being wrong in this newsgroup in the past, you have never done so that I recall. > > I hope you enjoy your delusions (and your reduced travel times). > -- > What the heck, I'll play too. - Dave Harry K |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Proof Positive You're Being MFFY'd With | 223rem | Driving | 2 | February 28th 06 05:55 PM |
Proof Positive You're Being MFFY'd With | gpsman | Driving | 0 | February 28th 06 01:24 PM |
Care to guess what the fine is for no proof of insurance? | Mike | Driving | 25 | December 1st 05 11:17 PM |
Ya ready for diesel yet? | Bret Ludwig | Jeep | 192 | October 2nd 05 09:47 PM |
Help with Positive Ground issues | thunderbeast | Antique cars | 5 | March 28th 04 07:51 AM |