8bitmullet

8bitmullet t1_j8vvi61 wrote

Probably someone too lazy to walk inside because they make you pay before pumping gas there.

(Which is why I never go there because unless you’re psychic you will always overpay or leave with a tank that’s not full)

3

8bitmullet t1_iyd3l3z wrote

It doesn’t matter who you were talking to.

You had the opportunity here to share some crucial context with every reader (that you ALSO did your due diligence and looked in their post history), which totally changes things, but you didn’t.

Why? Did you choose not to? Did you forget? Maybe you were feeling lazy. Maybe you’re making it up now after the fact. I don’t know, but one thing is for certain… that you failed to communicate the evidence you had clearly when given the opportunity.

So, ironically, you’re proving my point for me. Getting sufficient evidence (from you) leads to better decisions (from readers).

If you want to show me how I am wrong, I’m all ears. If you want to take responsibility and admit that you didn’t communicate clearly to everyone reading at first, I would respect you for it. But your last comment makes it look like you want to dodge the points I am making, and degrade the conversation into personal insults.

−1

8bitmullet t1_iycs54m wrote

So does a broken clock twice per day. Of course if we assume the worst about someone and their intentions we'll be right some of the time.

The collateral damage, of course, being that the internet gets shittier and more negative in general as a result.

This one interaction does not change the general rule...getting sufficient evidence before drawing conclusions leads to better decisions.

Far too many people take a hint or a shred and call it sufficient evidence. I am suggesting a higher threshold.

−1

8bitmullet t1_iujoojt wrote

While I don’t loaf in the left lane myself, if someone gets so impatient behind a loafer that they road rage and get in an accident then that is 100% their fault.

No one held a gun to their head and made them tailgate, or change lanes, or do anything. No one else is responsible for your or my feelings or decisions. They could have just continued riding slowly behind the loafer all angry but they chose to act in a way that puts themselves and others at risk. There is no actual risk driving slow behind a loafer. Just negative feelings.

So now we have laws in place to enable and pander to road ragers instead of holding them accountable by policing their actually dangerous behavior.

6

8bitmullet t1_iujnxxs wrote

Every conversation on tailgating I’ve ever seen, someone pops up and says but what about the people going slow in the left lane. Honestly, it’s getting tiring and it seems like a tactic to try and deflect to a different issue altogether.

What about the vast majority of tailgaters who are just impatient selfish whiny crybaby assholes who can’t stand the fact that they don’t get to go 15-20 over the limit at all times and so they ride your ass because you’re not passing fast enough to satiate their compulsions and whims? Or when you’re in the middle lane minding your own business going the speed limit. Or all the other scenarios where tailgaters tailgate.

Tailgaters are the real problem and yet there is zero accountability so they keep doing it.

13