There I was, Driving in the Right Lane...

On Tue, 14 Dec 2004 03:12:48 GMT, (Brent P)
wrote:

>In article >, Dave Head wrote:
>
>>>How is the left lane any better once drivers slower than you start
>>>driving there because they adopt your line of thought?
>
>> But the ducklings can't do that - they don't think at all - so they can't adopt
>> _any_ line of though.
>
>We aren't talking about ducklings. We are talking about cruising in the
>left lane. Your entire premise of 'safety' being the result of your
>LLBing ways is dependent on the vast majority of other drivers keeping
>right except to pass or at the very least, slower traffic keeping right.
>The moment they drive like you, but slower, your entire line of thought
>collaspes.

Not true. In fact, there's lotsa others here that drive left, and slower than
me too. I pass 'em on the right, in a heartbeat.

>>> You are depending
>>>on everybody who drives slower than you to obey keep right conventions
>>>and telling everybody who drives faster than you to go to hell.
>
>> Hell, I got on Rt. 3 tonight, set my usual speed, and passed _everybody_ I met,
>> except for the one guy off the line at the light at the edge of town, who just
>> had to win an imaginary race, and musta hit about 75 just to be ahead of me.
>> Which he was. For about 3 minutes. With my regular speed set in the cruise
>> control, he finally went back to not thinking, allowed his natural habits to
>> take over, and _slowed down_. Passed him too. Made my total 100%.
>> People drive slow around here...
>
>Diversion and misdirection. Your premise collaspes the moment drivers
>slower than you adopt your thinking and practice your 'left lane is
>safer' concept. As soon as that happens, that box truck appears out of
>the mist in front of you in the left lane too.

Fantasy land. Box trucks are on the right because it is easier for them.

>
>Not to mention that all others going faster are screwed over by you as it
>is.

Then why am I not "screwed over" by the others I catch that are slower than me
and in the left lane. Ans: Its because I'm not the sort of hardhead you are,
and pass 'em on the right, in a heartbeat, without much thinking about it.

>>>May you encounter only drivers like yourself, but slower.
>
>> No problem. I encounter people like me, but slower, I'll pass 'em on the
>> right. There's almost always a place to do that on my right...
>
>Spoken like someone who has never driven in REAL traffic.
>
I'm talking about driving _I_ do every day - and its around here, is all...

Dave Head

In article >, Dave Head wrote:
> On Tue, 14 Dec 2004 03:12:48 GMT, (Brent P) wrote:
>
>>In article >, Dave Head wrote:
>>
>>>>How is the left lane any better once drivers slower than you start
>>>>driving there because they adopt your line of thought?
>>
>>> But the ducklings can't do that - they don't think at all - so they can't adopt
>>> _any_ line of though.
>>
>>We aren't talking about ducklings. We are talking about cruising in the
>>left lane. Your entire premise of 'safety' being the result of your
>>LLBing ways is dependent on the vast majority of other drivers keeping
>>right except to pass or at the very least, slower traffic keeping right.
>>The moment they drive like you, but slower, your entire line of thought
>>collaspes.
>
> Not true. In fact, there's lotsa others here that drive left, and slower than
> me too. I pass 'em on the right, in a heartbeat.

Then you don't drive in real traffic. And since you don't drive in real
traffic, KRETP is even EASIER. Which in turn makes you even LAZIER.

>>>> You are depending
>>>>on everybody who drives slower than you to obey keep right conventions
>>>>and telling everybody who drives faster than you to go to hell.

>>> Hell, I got on Rt. 3 tonight, set my usual speed, and passed _everybody_ I met,
>>> except for the one guy off the line at the light at the edge of town, who just
>>> had to win an imaginary race, and musta hit about 75 just to be ahead of me.
>>> Which he was. For about 3 minutes. With my regular speed set in the cruise
>>> control, he finally went back to not thinking, allowed his natural habits to
>>> take over, and _slowed down_. Passed him too. Made my total 100%.
>>> People drive slow around here...

>>Diversion and misdirection. Your premise collaspes the moment drivers
>>slower than you adopt your thinking and practice your 'left lane is
>>safer' concept. As soon as that happens, that box truck appears out of
>>the mist in front of you in the left lane too.

> Fantasy land. Box trucks are on the right because it is easier for them.

Come to chicago some time. I am now rutinely finding box trucks in the
dan ryan express lanes where they are PROHIBITED. Sometimes in the LEFT
lanes of the express.

There are rutinely semis cruising in the left lanes of the edens and Kennedy
as well.

>>Not to mention that all others going faster are screwed over by you as it
>>is.

> Then why am I not "screwed over" by the others I catch that are slower than me
> and in the left lane. Ans: Its because I'm not the sort of hardhead you are,
> and pass 'em on the right, in a heartbeat, without much thinking about it.

Obviously you don't drive in anything approaching real traffic. In real
traffic, there are other people passing the LLB going faster than you on the
right keeping you from making a lane change. In real traffic there are
other vehiicles the LLB is keeping pace with in the right lanes blocking
you from passing on the right.

>>>>May you encounter only drivers like yourself, but slower.

>>> No problem. I encounter people like me, but slower, I'll pass 'em on the
>>> right. There's almost always a place to do that on my right...
>>
>>Spoken like someone who has never driven in REAL traffic.

> I'm talking about driving _I_ do every day - and its around here, is all...

Traffic so light it can absorb your selfishness. It's not always like
that everywhere. At 4am sunday LLBs don't bother me much. At 4pm sunday
they cause traffic jams.

In article >, Dave Head wrote:
> On Tue, 14 Dec 2004 03:12:48 GMT, (Brent P) wrote:
>
>>In article >, Dave Head wrote:
>>
>>>>How is the left lane any better once drivers slower than you start
>>>>driving there because they adopt your line of thought?
>>
>>> But the ducklings can't do that - they don't think at all - so they can't adopt
>>> _any_ line of though.
>>
>>We aren't talking about ducklings. We are talking about cruising in the
>>left lane. Your entire premise of 'safety' being the result of your
>>LLBing ways is dependent on the vast majority of other drivers keeping
>>right except to pass or at the very least, slower traffic keeping right.
>>The moment they drive like you, but slower, your entire line of thought
>>collaspes.
>
> Not true. In fact, there's lotsa others here that drive left, and slower than
> me too. I pass 'em on the right, in a heartbeat.

Then you don't drive in real traffic. And since you don't drive in real
traffic, KRETP is even EASIER. Which in turn makes you even LAZIER.

>>>> You are depending
>>>>on everybody who drives slower than you to obey keep right conventions
>>>>and telling everybody who drives faster than you to go to hell.

>>> Hell, I got on Rt. 3 tonight, set my usual speed, and passed _everybody_ I met,
>>> except for the one guy off the line at the light at the edge of town, who just
>>> had to win an imaginary race, and musta hit about 75 just to be ahead of me.
>>> Which he was. For about 3 minutes. With my regular speed set in the cruise
>>> control, he finally went back to not thinking, allowed his natural habits to
>>> take over, and _slowed down_. Passed him too. Made my total 100%.
>>> People drive slow around here...

>>Diversion and misdirection. Your premise collaspes the moment drivers
>>slower than you adopt your thinking and practice your 'left lane is
>>safer' concept. As soon as that happens, that box truck appears out of
>>the mist in front of you in the left lane too.

> Fantasy land. Box trucks are on the right because it is easier for them.

Come to chicago some time. I am now rutinely finding box trucks in the
dan ryan express lanes where they are PROHIBITED. Sometimes in the LEFT
lanes of the express.

There are rutinely semis cruising in the left lanes of the edens and Kennedy
as well.

>>Not to mention that all others going faster are screwed over by you as it
>>is.

> Then why am I not "screwed over" by the others I catch that are slower than me
> and in the left lane. Ans: Its because I'm not the sort of hardhead you are,
> and pass 'em on the right, in a heartbeat, without much thinking about it.

Obviously you don't drive in anything approaching real traffic. In real
traffic, there are other people passing the LLB going faster than you on the
right keeping you from making a lane change. In real traffic there are
other vehiicles the LLB is keeping pace with in the right lanes blocking
you from passing on the right.

>>>>May you encounter only drivers like yourself, but slower.

>>> No problem. I encounter people like me, but slower, I'll pass 'em on the
>>> right. There's almost always a place to do that on my right...
>>
>>Spoken like someone who has never driven in REAL traffic.

> I'm talking about driving _I_ do every day - and its around here, is all...

Traffic so light it can absorb your selfishness. It's not always like
that everywhere. At 4am sunday LLBs don't bother me much. At 4pm sunday
they cause traffic jams.

On Mon, 13 Dec 2004 17:45:45 GMT, "Bill 2" > wrote:

>
>"Scott en Aztlán" > wrote in message
>news >
>> >I've got my CC on, so I know it's not me changing speed.
>> >I'm just not sure what's on these peoples' minds.
>>
>> NOTHING - their heads are hollow and empty.
>>
>> It's a kind of automatic pilot scheme. Ducklings imprint on another
>> vehicle to reduce their own thinking load - for these people, it's too
>> difficult to make their own driving decisions, so they will latch onto
>> somebody else and simply do whetever the other driver does. If he
>> speeds up, they speed up. If he brakes, they brake. And if he swerves
>> to avoid a coyote that just ran out onto the road... Well, there's no
>> time for the duckling to react and avoid a collision, so he follows
>> the other driver into a flaming wreck on the side of the road.
>
>If you wanted to reduce your own thinking load, wouldn't it make more sense
>to pull in behind the vehicle you want to follow, and follow from a safe
>distance?

No - that requires constant vigilance to keep from rear-ending it if it slows
suddenly. Being a duckling, driving even with another car, leaves one an empty
highway in front.

Dave Head
>

On Mon, 13 Dec 2004 17:45:45 GMT, "Bill 2" > wrote:

>
>"Scott en Aztlán" > wrote in message
>news >
>> >I've got my CC on, so I know it's not me changing speed.
>> >I'm just not sure what's on these peoples' minds.
>>
>> NOTHING - their heads are hollow and empty.
>>
>> It's a kind of automatic pilot scheme. Ducklings imprint on another
>> vehicle to reduce their own thinking load - for these people, it's too
>> difficult to make their own driving decisions, so they will latch onto
>> somebody else and simply do whetever the other driver does. If he
>> speeds up, they speed up. If he brakes, they brake. And if he swerves
>> to avoid a coyote that just ran out onto the road... Well, there's no
>> time for the duckling to react and avoid a collision, so he follows
>> the other driver into a flaming wreck on the side of the road.
>
>If you wanted to reduce your own thinking load, wouldn't it make more sense
>to pull in behind the vehicle you want to follow, and follow from a safe
>distance?

No - that requires constant vigilance to keep from rear-ending it if it slows
suddenly. Being a duckling, driving even with another car, leaves one an empty
highway in front.

Dave Head
>

On Tue, 14 Dec 2004 01:52:23 GMT, E.R. > wrote:

>In a previous posting, Dave Head > had the
>audacity to say:
>
>:If the cops
>:ever act to keep the highways more in line with how _you_ think they should be
>and if the legislature ever passes the imaginary laws you think exist, and
>:some of which they actually repealed 30 - 35 years ago, for good reason), and
>:there isn't this big risk associated with being in the right lane, I just might
>:think about driving there more often...
>
>Come along boys (and girls), let's all chant after me:
>
>"Me First..."

You betcha - when the choice is between bleeding and not bleeding, I'm choosing
not bleeding. I'm not gonna bleed for a bunch of clueless SOB's that don't
think about their driving, latch onto my bumper and become an obstacle, and are
generally trying to get me killed without thinking about it.

On Tue, 14 Dec 2004 01:52:23 GMT, E.R. > wrote:

>In a previous posting, Dave Head > had the
>audacity to say:
>
>:If the cops
>:ever act to keep the highways more in line with how _you_ think they should be
>and if the legislature ever passes the imaginary laws you think exist, and
>:some of which they actually repealed 30 - 35 years ago, for good reason), and
>:there isn't this big risk associated with being in the right lane, I just might
>:think about driving there more often...
>
>Come along boys (and girls), let's all chant after me:
>
>"Me First..."

You betcha - when the choice is between bleeding and not bleeding, I'm choosing
not bleeding. I'm not gonna bleed for a bunch of clueless SOB's that don't
think about their driving, latch onto my bumper and become an obstacle, and are
generally trying to get me killed without thinking about it.

"Scott en Aztlán" > wrote in message
...
> On Mon, 13 Dec 2004 17:45:45 GMT, "Bill 2" > wrote:
>
> >If you wanted to reduce your own thinking load, wouldn't it make more
sense
> >to pull in behind the vehicle you want to follow, and follow from a safe
> >distance?
>
> No, it doesn't make sense. What are the chances that that other car s
> going to the same place that you want to go? Virtually nil, so why
> follow them?

Obviously if they take a turn off that you don't want, you don't follow
them. Just until they turn off you can use them as cheap cruise control
(while in their lane, from a safe distance). When the "mother duck" turns
off, does the duckling follow along, even if not the intended destination?

> And no, ducklings typically don't follow from a safe distance; they
> ride along next to you, or just off your port stern, or tailgating
> you. Like newborn infants, apparently a duckling can only focus on
> something if it is 6" in front of her face...

I know ducklings latch on to the bumper, but "because they are lazy" isn't
the only reason they latch on. It's because they are lazy AND because they
are stupid.

I use other cars as cheap cruise control all the time (when I don't have
cruise), but I don't latch on 6" behind them, or in the neighboring lane. I
just follow behind at a safe distance.

"Scott en Aztlán" > wrote in message
...
> On Mon, 13 Dec 2004 17:45:45 GMT, "Bill 2" > wrote:
>
> >If you wanted to reduce your own thinking load, wouldn't it make more
sense
> >to pull in behind the vehicle you want to follow, and follow from a safe
> >distance?
>
> No, it doesn't make sense. What are the chances that that other car s
> going to the same place that you want to go? Virtually nil, so why
> follow them?

Obviously if they take a turn off that you don't want, you don't follow
them. Just until they turn off you can use them as cheap cruise control
(while in their lane, from a safe distance). When the "mother duck" turns
off, does the duckling follow along, even if not the intended destination?

> And no, ducklings typically don't follow from a safe distance; they
> ride along next to you, or just off your port stern, or tailgating
> you. Like newborn infants, apparently a duckling can only focus on
> something if it is 6" in front of her face...

I know ducklings latch on to the bumper, but "because they are lazy" isn't
the only reason they latch on. It's because they are lazy AND because they
are stupid.

I use other cars as cheap cruise control all the time (when I don't have
cruise), but I don't latch on 6" behind them, or in the neighboring lane. I
just follow behind at a safe distance.

"Dave Head" > wrote in message
...
> >If you wanted to reduce your own thinking load, wouldn't it make more
sense
> >to pull in behind the vehicle you want to follow, and follow from a safe
> >distance?
>
> No - that requires constant vigilance to keep from rear-ending it if it
slows
> suddenly. Being a duckling, driving even with another car, leaves one an
empty
> highway in front.

That's why you follow from a safe distance. Plenty of time to react if the
car in front slows suddenly.