Do you dole out any vigilante justice? - Page 6 - Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community

Swarly · 04-15-2013, 01:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by polak

You shouldn't have any rule.

Leave space in between you and the car in front of you and if someone can fit in there, let them in. All you have to do is let off the gas so you slow down a bit.

yes, and you should do that for exactly one car

polak · 04-15-2013, 01:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sliver

No, alternating is correct and is the rule. It's a simple rule everybody can follow. Making it up on the fly by leaving space for every Tom, Dick and Harry is how bottlenecks happen. You slowing down to let multiple people in has a compounding effect on the traffic behind you. Leave room for one guy and keep on your way.

Alternating =/= I only let in one car and then ride the persons ass infront of me so that no one else can get in. Especially on a long merge.

Sliver · 04-15-2013, 02:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by polak

Alternating =/= I only let in one car and then ride the persons ass infront of me so that no one else can get in. Especially on a long merge.

Wrong, alternating does mean just letting one car in. Length of the merge lane is irrelevant.

I always wondered who these strugglers were that screwed up the simplest merges.

DuffMan · 04-15-2013, 02:27 PM

Who was that guy (banned, I believe)that used to argue about every single traffic conversation that happened. He drove every motorized vehicle ever made and had a class everything license.

Sliver reminds me of that guy.

valo403 · 04-15-2013, 02:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sliver

Wrong, alternating does mean just letting one car in. Length of the merge lane is irrelevant.

I always wondered who these strugglers were that screwed up the simplest merges.

You see one every time you walk past a mirror

Sliver · 04-15-2013, 02:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DuffMan

Who was that guy (banned, I believe)that used to argue about every single traffic conversation that happened.

Sliver reminds me of that guy.

I don't know who that is, but it wasn't me. I don't get into too many traffic-related arguments. But I do know I'm correct on this - alternating is the right way to merge. Do you think that's wrong?

Sliver · 04-15-2013, 02:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by valo403

You see one every time you walk past a mirror

Valo, please don't tell me you don't alternate one car in front of you/one car behind you in a merge!? Though we agree on next to nothing, I never pegged you for one of those.

gargamel · 04-15-2013, 02:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DuffMan

Who was that guy (banned, I believe)that used to argue about every single traffic conversation that happened. He drove every motorized vehicle ever made and had a class everything license.

Pinner?

valo403 · 04-15-2013, 02:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sliver

Valo, please don't tell me you don't alternate one car in front of you/one car behind you in a merge!? Though we agree on next to nothing, I never pegged you for one of those.

It's not a hard and fast rule. If there is space in front of me for a car to merge I'm not going to speed up because I've already let someone else merge. Ideally it works like a zipper, but that ideal doesn't fit every situation.

DuffMan · 04-15-2013, 02:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gargamel

Pinner?

Yes.

puckluck2 · 04-15-2013, 02:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DuffMan

Who was that guy (banned, I believe)that used to argue about every single traffic conversation that happened. He drove every motorized vehicle ever made and had a class everything license.

Sliver reminds me of that guy.

Pinner/undercoverbrother/ok...ok...I get it

Canehdianman · 04-15-2013, 03:16 PM

If there is no one in the merge lane, do I have to stop until someone shows up in order to alternate properly?

undercoverbrother · 04-15-2013, 03:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by puckluck2

Pinner/undercoverbrother/ok...ok...I get it

Nah son, not me, oh and for the record, I was not Pinner.

PM a mod for confirmation.

puffnstuff · 04-15-2013, 04:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by undercoverbrother

Nah son, not me, oh and for the record, I was not Pinner.

PM a mod for confirmation.

Or you could tell us how you think a 4way stop works...

Handsome B. Wonderful · 04-15-2013, 04:22 PM

I'm Batman.

squiggs96 · 04-15-2013, 04:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by valo403

Huh? What exactly about that indicates that it would not be safe? When you attempt to merge 300m earlier you wouldn't be wedging in? Quite the assumption there.

This:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Canehdianman

Over the years, I've had plenty of people try to block me out. I just move over anyways. This invariably leads them to honk and give me the finger, as though I am the one breaking traffic laws.

If you are in a car and want into the other lane, you signal and wait for an opening to appear. If you have someone not letting you in, whether it's in a construction zone or regular traffic on Deerfoot at noon from one lane to another, and you just move over anyways, that is unsafe. If you are changing lanes, and will hit a car if they don't brake, that is unsafe. That's not an assumption.

valo403 · 04-15-2013, 04:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by squiggs96

This:

If you are in a car and want into the other lane, you signal and wait for an opening to appear. If you have someone not letting you in, whether it's in a construction zone or regular traffic on Deerfoot at noon from one lane to another, and you just move over anyways, that is unsafe. If you are changing lanes, and will hit a car if they don't brake, that is unsafe. That's not an assumption.

Ah, didn't see that in his scenario. Fair enough.

undercoverbrother · 04-15-2013, 04:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by puffnstuff

Or you could tell us how you think a 4way stop works...

Floor the pedal, blast your horn, and hope for the best.

Canehdianman · 04-15-2013, 04:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by squiggs96

If you are in a car and want into the other lane, you signal and wait for an opening to appear. If you have someone not letting you in, whether it's in a construction zone or regular traffic on Deerfoot at noon from one lane to another, and you just move over anyways, that is unsafe. If you are changing lanes, and will hit a car if they don't brake, that is unsafe. That's not an assumption.

As I get near the end of the merge/closing lane, I put my signal light on to move over. If you (or someone else) decides that they don't have to let me in (hint: this is the part that is against the law, not me changing lanes) and pulls forward to close the gap, what do you expect me to do?

As I said in my initial post, this is what I do when someone decides to try to block me out.

You Need a Thneed · 04-15-2013, 04:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by valo403

Huh? What exactly about that indicates that it would not be safe? When you attempt to merge 300m earlier you wouldn't be wedging in? Quite the assumption there.

The fact is that it is more efficient to utilize all available road and for lanes to alternate at the point where one lane ends. If a lane closure or merge was supposed to be completed 300m further back then it would have been placed as such.

To be completely frank, it is the people who merge in early that cause traffic backups. It makes the backed up lanes extend further back than they need to.

The whole argument that traffic should move over as soon as they know about a lane closure makes no sense either. If you are driving on the Trans Canada in Moose Jaw, and you know that there happens to be construction on 16th Ave in Calgary that closes a lane, do you have to not use that lane for 600 km? I don't see the difference between not using a lane for 300m, and not using a lane for 600km. If the point where "you should merge" is arbitrary, then it makes no difference. However, in situation like being talked about, there is a set aside place to merge - i.e. where the barriers are.

Totally agree with the part I bolded.