5 ms·

You responded to a very educational comment with this. You should apply your comments to the other user’s decision-making process. Either one or both of the car

You responded to a very educational comment with this. You should apply your comments to the other user’s decision-making process. Either one or both of the cars in your example will be giving hints that the gap will close, let alone the trucks. If the motorcyclist is behind you, he will see that something’s wrong. If he’s starting to pass, he will brake. If he’s in the middle of the pass, he will clear before the gap closes. In very unusual circumstances, you will be forced into the other car by some sudden circumstances and the motorcyclist might get caught, but you should know from driving much of your life how likely this is, and some aggregated data is also available. Your other example about arbitrarily using the edge of the lane would be even easier to detect using his framework.

burfog 8y ago
I wouldn't call it educational. It was motivated denial. It was also unfairly presuming that motorcyclists are more alert/careful/skilled than other drivers. This is clearly not the case. Just a couple months ago, I suddenly had a 4-inch gap on either side. (confirmed by my son in the other front seat) Perhaps the road was badly designed or built, but that happens. It's 20 feet from one end of my vehicle to the other. Escaping that isn't so easy.
- erikpukinskis 8y ago
  What a disappointing thread. You two should try harder to understand what the other is saying, rather than just digging your heels in and pretending your words are the only ones in the conversation that matter. The opportunity for a great discussion was there, because both of you have relevant experience and have thought carefully about the situation. Oh well. Instead you just spent paragraph after paragraph trying to set the boundaries of the discussion in a way that excludes the other.
  - mcny 8y ago
    I think the difference is cultural. I cannot accept lane splitting at high speeds (35mph+) as long as humans still have license to drive. Once we rescind all humans the license to drive, I'm OK with lane splitting. Think of it this easy. In the four car scenario: how would a bike pass cars that are at the speed limit? By going over the speed limit. Lane splitting by humans (not talking about filtering) ought to be against the law.

burfog 8y ago

I wouldn't call it educational. It was motivated denial. It was also unfairly presuming that motorcyclists are more alert/careful/skilled than other drivers. This is clearly not the case. Just a couple months ago, I suddenly had a 4-inch gap on either side. (confirmed by my son in the other front seat) Perhaps the road was badly designed or built, but that happens. It's 20 feet from one end of my vehicle to the other. Escaping that isn't so easy.

erikpukinskis 8y ago
What a disappointing thread. You two should try harder to understand what the other is saying, rather than just digging your heels in and pretending your words are the only ones in the conversation that matter. The opportunity for a great discussion was there, because both of you have relevant experience and have thought carefully about the situation. Oh well. Instead you just spent paragraph after paragraph trying to set the boundaries of the discussion in a way that excludes the other.
- mcny 8y ago
  I think the difference is cultural. I cannot accept lane splitting at high speeds (35mph+) as long as humans still have license to drive. Once we rescind all humans the license to drive, I'm OK with lane splitting. Think of it this easy. In the four car scenario: how would a bike pass cars that are at the speed limit? By going over the speed limit. Lane splitting by humans (not talking about filtering) ought to be against the law.