From: Clive George on 25 Nov 2009 20:48 "Conor" <conor(a)gmx.co.uk> wrote in message news:MPG.2577ed15d4a3a1e49899ac(a)news.eternal-september.org... > In article <TMSdnXoM9Ls-XJDWnZ2dnUVZ7tFi4p2d(a)giganews.com>, Ray Keattch > says... > >> The high beam helps the driver behind to see further ahead > > Rubbish. Clue: Big lump of metal in the way. Line of sight. Not rubbish at all. Clue : road positioning. >> - the use of >> main beam is not being taken as a signal to overtake! > > It was earlier in the thread by Clive who seems to have gone very quiet. Oi - I've never suggested such a thing. In fact I've mentioned several times that you're wrong in that assumption. As I said only about 2 hours ago (though it must have been very quietly, since you've not noticed), I've only seen you and Silk say it's about signalling it's safe to overtake.
From: Clive George on 25 Nov 2009 21:05 "Conor" <conor(a)gmx.co.uk> wrote in message news:MPG.2577ed86c7af96999899ae(a)news.eternal-september.org... > In article <QNOdnSOFLok5WJDWnZ2dnUVZ8kmdnZ2d(a)brightview.co.uk>, Clive > George says... >> >> "Conor" <conor(a)gmx.co.uk> wrote in message >> news:MPG.2577c12d4c45e4039899a1(a)news.eternal-september.org... >> >> > Yet it has been mentioned earlier in this thread that they were used as >> > an indicator of an oncoming vehicle. >> >> By who? > > You. Are you lying or just confused? I've done no such thing. I even checked that there wasn't anything which could be misread - I'm pretty sure there isn't. Can you give me a message-id?
From: NM on 25 Nov 2009 22:41 On 25 Nov, 23:30, Harry Bloomfield <harry.m1...(a)NOSPAM.tiscali.co.uk> wrote: > NM expressed precisely : > > > Why is it encumbent on the truck driver to help you make your mind up? > > Why is it encumbent upon me to give way to a truck which is struggling > to get out at a junction. Why is it encumbent upon me to hold back and > hold back the vehicles behind me when a truck is struggling his way > around a tight two lane roundabout, when I could easily fly past him at > no risk to me. It is called courtesy. > The expectation of which is not a right.
From: vulgarandmischevious on 26 Nov 2009 00:29 Conor <conor(a)gmx.co.uk> wrote: >In article <kverg5l9cats1c3o44pgjj84dkef4eanbb(a)4ax.com>, >vulgarandmischevious says... > >> The classic not-very-bright truck-drivers response to any complaint. >> >The truth hurts does it? > >> So, I suppose you never complain about anyone else who provides an >> essential service when they do it poorly? > >They're not doing it poorly. Just because you happen to get held up due >to your incompetence doesn't impact on the fact they get the goods to >where they're supposed to be going when they're supposed to get there. You would do well to remember that I hold a C+E licence.
From: The Older Gentleman on 26 Nov 2009 02:17
<snip> General observation: why is privacy.net the last refuge of complete tossers? Think Spacker on upce. -- BMW K1100LT Ducati 750SS Honda CB400F Triumph Street Triple Suzuki TS250ER GN250 Damn, back to six bikes! Try Googling before asking a damn silly question. chateau dot murray at idnet dot com |