I tried my best to understand, by deduction, whatever argument you were trying to make but were unable to present. That is trying to understand what you have been saying. But you have neither agreed with your argument as I had to deduce it, nor offered a different argument to correct my deduction. The point you are trying to make is still unknown.

You say that you have tried to describe a difference in nuances, a difference between nuances or between yours and mine, or what? And I have replied that we agree that the kinds of nuances that you describe are useful indications regarding traffic behavior. So why do you choose to disagree about that understanding? I don't understand why you chose to make a point of disagreeing with me about them. So far as I can understand, it is a matter of disagreeing for the sake of doing so.