Originally Posted by Helmet Head
Oh, it was a joke, which was practically mandated by your OP. However, you did give it some credibility (which makes it funnier) with this statement: "I would have held a predictable line rather than swerving in and out as you and Serge indicated."
Apparently, neither budster nor I provided enough clarification in our posts to make it clear to at least one bike lane supporter that we were not advocating anything that would be contrary to maintaining a predictable line. How you reached this conclusion, at least regarding my post is partially explained here:
If there are truly no gaps sufficient to establish a more assertive line to the left, then negotiation would be used, of course. Standard technique, but I guess I can't assume that's obvious in this thread. So I'll spell it out:
D. if there is no "natural" gap, looking back over your left shoulder for more than a split-second signals a request to merge left. If that does not work, use a standard arm signal. Either way, when a motorist yields to your request, by slowing down and/or merging left himself, you reestablish a new predictable line, further left, in the space yielded to you.
Joke my butt - don't push me. This thread WILL NOT deteriorate into your personal political soap box as all the others do. You have been warned.
Yes, I imagine you were not clear enough when you said:
"If i'm being passed by a steady stream of cars, and one or two get too close obviously because they don't want to move out of the lane at all, then I will merge left until that behavior ceases"
I don't see any mention of natural gaps, requests or arm signals, it comes off like you are trying to squeeze the cars over by increasing the risk of them hitting you. Perhaps you should attempt to explain more clearly and concisely going forward?
__________________
"Let us hope our weapons are never needed --but do not forget what the common people knew when they demanded the Bill of Rights: An armed citizenry is the first defense, the best defense, and the final defense against tyranny. If guns are outlawed, only the government will have guns. Only the police, the secret police, the military, the hired servants of our rulers. Only the government -- and a few outlaws. I intend to be among the outlaws" - Edward Abbey