From: Brimstone on

"Phil W Lee" <phil(at)lee-family(dot)me(dot)uk> wrote in message
> "Brimstone" <brimstone(a)> considered Tue, 30 Mar 2010
> 19:19:42 +0100 the perfect time to write:
>>"Phil W Lee" <phil(at)lee-family(dot)me(dot)uk> wrote in message
>>> Jim A <ja(a)> considered Tue, 30 Mar 2010 07:40:24
>>> +0100 the perfect time to write:
>>>>Phil W Lee wrote:
>>>>> Adrian <toomany2cvs(a)> considered 29 Mar 2010 17:32:25 GMT the
>>>>> perfect time to write:
>>>>>> Doug <jagmad(a)> gurgled happily, sounding much like they
>>>>>> were
>>>>>> saying:
>>>>>>> The term 'corking' has become accepted in connection with CM and in
>>>>>>> several countries. If you were familiar with the subject you would
>>>>>>> know
>>>>>>> it.
>>>>>> You can call it what you like. The fact remains that it is a
>>>>>> euphemism
>>>>>> for an illegal obstruction.
>>>>>> Or are you trying to deny that?
>>>>> If you call a road position intended to prevent vehicular assault
>>>>> illegal, then you are clearly in denial of reality.
>>>> >
>>>>> Corking is used to PREVENT illegal acts by motorists deliberately
>>>>> driving out into the path of (and even into the side of) other
>>>>> vehicles on the major road, and with legal priority.
>>>>Two wrongs don't make a right.
>>> It's only the drivers who think they should be allowed to just drive
>>> into more vulnerable traffic on the major road who regard corking as
>>> wrong.
>>Not so. I've never witnessed a CM ride from any vantage point and I
>>the illegal obstruction of traffic to be wrong.
> And I entirely agree with you.
> Illegal obstruction of traffic is wrong.

> Placing your vehicle in such a way as to reinforce the normal highway
> priorities to drivers who would otherwise ignore them is not.

In what way is stopping traffic emerging across a "give way" line not