Talk:2932: Driving PSA - Revision history

82.132.239.130: Making headers into pseudo-header formatting. (In response to apparent wish to TOC the article, which is not advisable anyway.)

2026-03-30T03:30:16Z

Making headers into pseudo-header formatting. (In response to apparent wish to TOC the article, which is not advisable anyway.)

172.69.135.174 at 21:02, 21 March 2025

2025-03-21T21:02:49Z

PDesbeginner at 14:19, 20 June 2024

2024-06-20T14:19:28Z

162.158.49.85 at 21:51, 19 June 2024

2024-06-19T21:51:25Z

PDesbeginner at 14:42, 19 June 2024

2024-06-19T14:42:55Z

PDesbeginner: /* Explanation Complete? */ new section

2024-06-19T03:55:36Z

‎Explanation Complete?: new section

141.101.98.119 at 17:20, 5 June 2024

2024-06-05T17:20:17Z

Elektrizikekswerk: /* This discussion ^^ */

2024-05-27T14:26:39Z

‎This discussion ^^

Elektrizikekswerk: /* This discussion ^^ */

2024-05-27T14:24:51Z

‎This discussion ^^

172.70.162.17 at 10:32, 27 May 2024

2024-05-27T10:32:18Z

@@ Line 79: / Line 79: @@
 I think the bigger problem with this situation is that the person waiving their right if way is preventing the left-turn lane to drain, which is about to spill over into the lane to its right. --[[User:Coconut Galaxy|Coconut Galaxy]] ([[User talk:Coconut Galaxy|talk]]) 12:18, 26 May 2024 (UTC)
-==Churchill's Law==
+;Churchill's Law
 Just to reframe "''Car that they are waving you into the path of''" into an awkaward phrase NOT ending in a preposition: "''Car into the path of which they are waving you''". (The Churchill thing is a myth, though <https://quoteinvestigator.com/2012/07/04/churchill-preposition/> .) {{unsigned ip|162.158.134.225}}
 : Yuck - that construction needs waving into the path of an oncoming car. Or possibly it already has been.[[Special:Contributions/172.69.43.183|172.69.43.183]] 14:31, 14 May 2024 (UTC)
-==PSA==
+;PSA
 I thought PSA was Peugeot Société Anonyme, and was wondering why this was specific to French Cars.
 Or possibly Prostate specific antibody.
@@ Line 96: / Line 95: @@
 :I just cackled so loudly that I scared my cat off my lap. Prostate-specific antibody? Help [[User:Psychoticpotato|Psychoticpotato]] ([[User talk:Psychoticpotato|talk]]) 12:48, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
-== This discussion ^^ ==
+;This discussion ^^
 For a bicyclist like me, it is quite weird to have such a lengthy discussion about laws in using an intersection by car.
 Here in Germany, we would rather talk about psychological aspects (like being put under pressure by having been granted right-of-way).
@@ Line 125: / Line 123: @@
 The thing is, with or without the semi, I feel like Randall wouldn't be able to see well enough to properly ascertain safety, and thus (with or without the truck, with or without waving) he'd have to approach the median anyway, cross the near side anyway, spot the danger guy all on his own. Also, seems weird to have a dedicated left-turn lane WITHOUT a traffic light, at the very least seems weird to have a LINE when there's no light stopping them. If the truck was in front, maybe, since he needs a FAR bigger gap in oncoming traffic... [[User:NiceGuy1|NiceGuy1]] ([[User talk:NiceGuy1|talk]]) 06:40, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
-== Explanation Complete? ==
+;Explanation Complete?
 This explanation seems complete to me. I think we should remove the tag. [[User:PDesbeginner|PDesbeginner]] ([[User talk:PDesbeginner|talk]]) 03:55, 19 June 2024 (UTC)

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
 <!--Please sign your posts with ~~~~ and don't delete this text. New comments should be added at the bottom.-->
 Did the best I could on the explanation, even if it's a bit clunky. [[User:Trogdor147|Trogdor147]] ([[User_talk:Trogdor147|talk]]) 03:59, 14 May 2024 (UTC)
 Pretty lame strategy. Even with someone waving me on, when I get past them I'll look to the right to make sure. [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 04:22, 14 May 2024 (UTC)
@@ Line 25: / Line 24: @@
 : I think I've seen such setups in Ohio, but here in New Jersey I cannot imagine a scenario like this. Any movement between a divided highway and another road where left turns are allowed in both directions will be controlled by a traffic light with a left arrow. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.63.69|162.158.63.69]] 16:03, 16 May 2024 (UTC)
 : Not having a traffic light here in North America is common if the up/down road is very important and busy, and Randall's road is VERY minor. In other words, Randall's road isn't important enough to stop up/down traffic for a traffic light, the city planners feel the occasional car there can just wait for a gap in traffic. On the other hand, I don't think I've ever seen a dedicated left-turn lane like this WITHOUT a traffic light, or at least not one with so many cars waiting without a red light. :) [[User:NiceGuy1|NiceGuy1]] ([[User talk:NiceGuy1|talk]]) 06:40, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
 Uncontrolled intersection with a left turn onto a 4-lane road? US road design, combined with US car-centric settlement planning, must have been made by those more clever, trying-harder assassins that Randall mentions in the title text, and it looks like they've got a lot of people on their list. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.229.131|162.158.229.131]] 07:20, 14 May 2024 (UTC)
@@ Line 37: / Line 35: @@
 ::: With a few caveats (such as there clearly having been enough instantaneous traffic to fill up the cross-turn deceleration lane, which can't be 'all' explained by the right-of-way-waiving vehicle, and some slightly different shapes of kerbing in the vicinity), you certainly ''could'' see an equivalent-but-mirrored junction as the comic in the UK. You could also see the non-turning vehicle zooming through, but a) it should not be sitting in the offside lane (unless overtaking an unseen, off-comic vehicle on the nearside), and b) it'll probably be going faster (technically could be up to 70MPH for National Speed Limit on dual-carriageway, though it's very likely the junction itself will be re-restricted down to 60MPH or even 50MPH). Not that drivers necesarily keep out of the 'overtaking' lane(s) when they don't need to, or stay below the statutary/posted limits. And if this is an 'urban trunkroad' it may actually even be 40MPH all the way, with frequent 30MPH (or even 20MPH) sideroads feeding/fed-by it.
 ::: But there'll be exceptions, both more restrictive and less restrictive, than even the various range of places and solutions that I can immediately bring to mind. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.195.180|172.69.195.180]] 23:02, 16 May 2024 (UTC)
 Ok, but... time traveller asassins don't get sent for random harmless people? Getting not one, but MULTIPLE asassins hell-bent on offing him suggests he's going to do something incredibly bad for the world that they're trying to prevent?? [[Special:Contributions/162.158.103.68|162.158.103.68]] 08:35, 14 May 2024 (UTC)
@@ Line 45: / Line 42: @@
 :: Shouldn't our reality be clogged with swarms of time-traveling butterfly assassins? In fact, why do butterflies even exist? Surely they would have been wiped out on some primordial beach eons ago. [[User:These Are Not The Comments You Are Looking For|These Are Not The Comments You Are Looking For]] ([[User talk:These Are Not The Comments You Are Looking For|talk]]) 21:35, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
 : It's quite obvious that one of examples in What If 3 will be used to win World War IV. The assassins from losing side are trying to prevent writing the book, hoping that without it the other side never get so crazy idea. -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 19:59, 14 May 2024 (UTC)
 Oh boy, a comic about my second-greatest pet peeve on the road!  Now if only we could have an xkcd guide to using the acceleration lane. [[User:Phil Srobeighn|Phil Srobeighn]] ([[User talk:Phil Srobeighn|talk]]) 09:51, 14 May 2024 (UTC)
@@ Line 60: / Line 56: @@
 A discussion of the liability issue in this situation. [https://www.allenandallen.com/can-i-be-successfully-sued-for-waving-a-car-in-front-of-me/#:~:text=Yes%2C%20you%20can.%20There%20are%20circumstances%20in%20which,be%20legally%20liable%20for%20injuries%20and%20financial%20losses.] [[User:Philhower|Philhower]] ([[User talk:Philhower|talk]]) 15:55, 14 May 2024 (UTC)
 <br>TL;DR: Waving makes you liable in the state of Virginia (also in Germany)
 I remember when taking my driver's education class (in New Jersey, in 1987), the instructor made a point of teaching us to ignore civilians waving and to never wave other traffic anywhere.  If you wave a car in this manner, and it ends up getting into a collision, you can be held liable for the damage.  You could also be charged with directing traffic without authorization - something typically only done by law enforcement officers and road construction crews.  [[User:Shamino|Shamino]] ([[User talk:Shamino|talk]]) 17:27, 14 May 2024 (UTC)
 I must point out, no one has a privilege to go. The "right of way" only refers to the side of the road. Stop using the term wrong. [[User:SDSpivey|SDSpivey]] ([[User talk:SDSpivey|talk]]) 20:46, 14 May 2024 (UTC)
@@ Line 70: / Line 64: @@
 ::: "has to give way to other traffic", that '''''IS''''' "right of way". That's what the phrase means, when the laws say who is supposed to go first. :) For example, I'm not sure how official THIS is, but at least the rule (law?) is that if both of these cars - Randall and the waver - arrived at the EXACT same time, the priority is that the person to the right goes first, until you run out of people (if someone was across from Randall and also arrived at the same time, HE would get to go first, then the waver, then Randall. Since there isn't, that means the waver goes first. Except the line shows that they DIDN'T arrive at the same time). There's also laws about someone going straight has priority over someone turning, and I know in some parts of the world the big road has right of way over the small road (so, since everyone is turning, the waver would go first due to being on a higher priority road). [[User:NiceGuy1|NiceGuy1]] ([[User talk:NiceGuy1|talk]]) 06:56, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
 :I concur.  It depends on Jurisdiction.  Some states definitely use the phrase "right of way" in their traffic laws.  If there's an accident, the party with the right of way is presumed not at fault because he had the right to do what he did.  In other states (like NJ), there is no such thing - the law only states that drivers in certain situations "must yield".  In a state like this, if a traffic case goes to court, the judge will only try to determine the answer to "were you able to prevent the collision?"  If you were (and in many cases, the answer is "yes" for both parties), then you may be found liable, even if the other driver violated the law (e.g by failing to yield where he was required to).  [[User:Shamino|Shamino]] ([[User talk:Shamino|talk]]) 17:29, 16 May 2024 (UTC)
 I want to clarify that the initial post on this thread is not entirely correct, as it is dependent on the jurisdiction, whether it be on a national level, state level, etc. Where I am from in the United States in the state of Utah, for instance, it is codified in Utah traffic code 41-6a-801 Subsections (3)(b)(i) and (3)(d) (see https://le.utah.gov/xcode/Title41/Chapter6A/41-6a-S801.html?v=C41-6a-S801_2015051220150512 if you want) that traffic can turn into the turn lane and wait until the opportunity arises to merge, provided they do not travel further than 500 feet in that lane (in addition to other qualifications that are largely irrelevant to the present subject). While that is inapplicable in the case of this comic, as I do not know of ANY jurisdiction where turning onto a median itself is legal, that does not necessarily mean that it is illegal to turn into a dual direction turn lane and then merge into traffic in all jurisdictions. Apologies if I formatted this comment poorly.[[User:SilentLurker|SilentLurker]] ([[User talk:SilentLurker|talk]]) 23:00, 14 May 2024 (UTC)
 If this has happened to Randall several times during the last month alone, then MAYBE he has a habit of stopping his car too far out and/or too far on the left? So that the left-turning time travellers would have difficulties getting past him? Just asking, because this is when people regularly wave ME out. --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.154.77|162.158.154.77]] 08:05, 15 May 2024 (UTC)
 :Randall lives in Boston. When I lived in Boston variations on people helpfully waving me to my death was a common occurrence. [[User:Bugstomper|Bugstomper]] ([[User talk:Bugstomper|talk]]) 11:51, 15 May 2024 (UTC)
 Applauds rare actually funny use of Citation needed. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.163.121|172.70.163.121]] 10:40, 15 May 2024 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:19, 20 June 2024
Line 141:		Line 141:
	:If you have to ask, you clearly aren't sure enough. Yes, probably a little 'old' (back a month) to still have this. But if it hasn't gone, then I can only imagine that those editors who would delete it from ''the very latest comic'' (before even the next gets put up) have had their reasons not to. I'm a great fan of "consensus by doing", though. For anything not ''actually'' clearly trolling then it's cleaner to ask forgiveness than permission, if you have it wrong. If you removed it and someone else disagreed and replaced it then... well, then it becomes a matter of opinion, and anybody else who wishes to weigh in on the issue.		:If you have to ask, you clearly aren't sure enough. Yes, probably a little 'old' (back a month) to still have this. But if it hasn't gone, then I can only imagine that those editors who would delete it from ''the very latest comic'' (before even the next gets put up) have had their reasons not to. I'm a great fan of "consensus by doing", though. For anything not ''actually'' clearly trolling then it's cleaner to ask forgiveness than permission, if you have it wrong. If you removed it and someone else disagreed and replaced it then... well, then it becomes a matter of opinion, and anybody else who wishes to weigh in on the issue.
	:This whole site is a community effort, and the net community opinion will rectify anything that the net community finds wrong. (Whether that be the removal of anything or ''not'' removing something...) [[Special:Contributions/162.158.49.85\|162.158.49.85]] 21:51, 19 June 2024 (UTC)		:This whole site is a community effort, and the net community opinion will rectify anything that the net community finds wrong. (Whether that be the removal of anything or ''not'' removing something...) [[Special:Contributions/162.158.49.85\|162.158.49.85]] 21:51, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
		+
		+	:Okay. Glad to have your opinion. [[User:PDesbeginner\|PDesbeginner]] ([[User talk:PDesbeginner\|talk]]) 14:19, 20 June 2024 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:51, 19 June 2024
Line 139:		Line 139:

	I will wait until June 23 for any objections. Then I will remove the tag. [[User:PDesbeginner\|PDesbeginner]] ([[User talk:PDesbeginner\|talk]]) 14:42, 19 June 2024 (UTC)		I will wait until June 23 for any objections. Then I will remove the tag. [[User:PDesbeginner\|PDesbeginner]] ([[User talk:PDesbeginner\|talk]]) 14:42, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
		+	:If you have to ask, you clearly aren't sure enough. Yes, probably a little 'old' (back a month) to still have this. But if it hasn't gone, then I can only imagine that those editors who would delete it from ''the very latest comic'' (before even the next gets put up) have had their reasons not to. I'm a great fan of "consensus by doing", though. For anything not ''actually'' clearly trolling then it's cleaner to ask forgiveness than permission, if you have it wrong. If you removed it and someone else disagreed and replaced it then... well, then it becomes a matter of opinion, and anybody else who wishes to weigh in on the issue.
		+	:This whole site is a community effort, and the net community opinion will rectify anything that the net community finds wrong. (Whether that be the removal of anything or ''not'' removing something...) [[Special:Contributions/162.158.49.85\|162.158.49.85]] 21:51, 19 June 2024 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:42, 19 June 2024
Line 137:		Line 137:

	This explanation seems complete to me. I think we should remove the tag. [[User:PDesbeginner\|PDesbeginner]] ([[User talk:PDesbeginner\|talk]]) 03:55, 19 June 2024 (UTC)		This explanation seems complete to me. I think we should remove the tag. [[User:PDesbeginner\|PDesbeginner]] ([[User talk:PDesbeginner\|talk]]) 03:55, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
		+
		+	I will wait until June 23 for any objections. Then I will remove the tag. [[User:PDesbeginner\|PDesbeginner]] ([[User talk:PDesbeginner\|talk]]) 14:42, 19 June 2024 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 03:55, 19 June 2024
Line 133:		Line 133:

	The thing is, with or without the semi, I feel like Randall wouldn't be able to see well enough to properly ascertain safety, and thus (with or without the truck, with or without waving) he'd have to approach the median anyway, cross the near side anyway, spot the danger guy all on his own. Also, seems weird to have a dedicated left-turn lane WITHOUT a traffic light, at the very least seems weird to have a LINE when there's no light stopping them. If the truck was in front, maybe, since he needs a FAR bigger gap in oncoming traffic... [[User:NiceGuy1\|NiceGuy1]] ([[User talk:NiceGuy1\|talk]]) 06:40, 19 May 2024 (UTC)		The thing is, with or without the semi, I feel like Randall wouldn't be able to see well enough to properly ascertain safety, and thus (with or without the truck, with or without waving) he'd have to approach the median anyway, cross the near side anyway, spot the danger guy all on his own. Also, seems weird to have a dedicated left-turn lane WITHOUT a traffic light, at the very least seems weird to have a LINE when there's no light stopping them. If the truck was in front, maybe, since he needs a FAR bigger gap in oncoming traffic... [[User:NiceGuy1\|NiceGuy1]] ([[User talk:NiceGuy1\|talk]]) 06:40, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
		+
		+	== Explanation Complete? ==
		+
		+	This explanation seems complete to me. I think we should remove the tag. [[User:PDesbeginner\|PDesbeginner]] ([[User talk:PDesbeginner\|talk]]) 03:55, 19 June 2024 (UTC)

@@ Line 12: / Line 12: @@
 :: The opposite crossing is a matter of the 'easy' junction-exit carriageway (as just given) plus an unrestricted view of the fast-lane, but then you need to catch the eye of any queued turn-lane vehicles (and look at what round-the-roundabout traffic might be holding the front of that queue up, in the near future) to make sure that when you take advantage of a clear offside then the subsequent nearside cars don't start shuffling up. And recognise the oblivious/inconsiderate/obtuse drivers by their general road positioning and attitude at the wheel. (It's a bit of an art, but stood me in good stead so far.)
 :: There is also, elsewher, a ''particularly'' akward right-turn (UK, remember) onto a mainish road, that I sometimes need to drive round. It comes in as single-becoming-double lane, but these days that double is buslane and singular other (from the right, the double-becoming-single is also buslane nearside, except for inward turners who aren't in contention with me but ''are'' potentially view-blocking). Between the two carriageways (which merge, at the single-lane side, as two standard single contra-carriageways beyond an actual light-controlled staggered pedestrian crossing) is the central turning refuge that I potentially need to pause in to turn right, and left-approaching traffic may need to pause in (crossing my path) to turn into the road I'm emerging from. The most problematic are the turning-in cars that ''don't signal'' (or far too late), given that everyone (not a bus) has to keep right anyway on this widened stretch, but some of them are keeping right in order to turn right. And driver-to-driver visual communication (or even seeing if they're glancing in your direction/meeting your questioning gaze) is isn't helped by angled windscreens often drowning out (apparent) driver-on-driver visibility by the reflection of the sky above. So it pays to be cautious, and taking a moment before taking apparent cues (arm waves, light flashes, etc) as you think they might be intended. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.160.248|172.70.160.248]] 15:55, 14 May 2024 (UTC)
-:Not reading all that. [[User:Psychoticpotato|Psychoticpotato]] ([[User talk:Psychoticpotato|talk]]) 12:42, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
+:::Not reading all that. [[User:Psychoticpotato|Psychoticpotato]] ([[User talk:Psychoticpotato|talk]]) 12:42, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
 Maybe they're not trying to kill Randall, but the person in the other lane. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.154.225|172.71.154.225]] 05:00, 14 May 2024 (UTC)

@@ Line 130: / Line 130: @@
 :::::: My words were "which I've never seen". In the UK, except in the context of a Toucan Crossing. We have those advanced stop lines, aplenty, with the exact same round (or arrowed) traffic lights directing every vehicle (however many wheels, however many engines) sitting in the appropriate slot on the road. But the {{w|Toucan crossing}} is the only 'bike-only green' seen (except that it's not bike-only, it's bike-and-pedestrian, ...and-horse, also, if combined with a Pegasus crossing), and that's not on the road but across a road, and it quite on roads where bikes are likely also using the road (and obeying their direction's all-traffic signals, if ridden correctly).
 :::::: And it seems we're never going to mesh with what it means about "having to obey the same rules" where some rules are ''explicitly'' about motor vehicles and therefore exempt non-motor ones. But, IMO, should be practically enforced better against electrical-motor-assisted vehicles that are barely - or not even - bicycles any more... i.e. illegally supercharged "no pedalling" variations on regular electric bikes, the electric scooters that are on the dodgy side of legality for much of the country (road ''or'' footway) and unlicenced+unregistered full on electric-motorbikes that don't even pretend to have pedals; all of these are giving legitimate cyclists and electrically-assisted cyclists even more of a bad name. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.162.17|172.70.162.17]]
-::::::: Ok, last post from me in this topic: I know signs (and thus "special rules") for tractors, cars, trucks, trailers, buses, taxis, caravans, bikes, mopeds (incl. small {{w|Scooter_(motorcycle)|scooters}}), motorbikes, {{w|Motorized_scooter|electro scooters}}, horses, even skates and skateboards (albeit I doubt these are official), but none for (un)motorized verhicles (except one that requires you to kill the engine when halting). So maybe it's an UK issue. Most of the mentioned rules don't affect the right-of-way but regulate access to specific lanes, roads and streets or parking places. The Toucan crossing are very common here, too (albeit they don't have a special name here, afaik), and are no exception ti this as they grant access to the crossing (normally only for pedestrians) for bikes which, without that traffic light, would need to use the "normal" road (and traffic lights) like a car. Which is exactly my point. I'd agree though that those overpowered electro bikes shouldn't be treated as "normal" bikes but more like mopeds. [[User:Elektrizikekswerk|Elektrizikekswerk]] ([[User talk:Elektrizikekswerk|talk]]) 14:24, 27 May 2024 (UTC)
+::::::: Ok, last post from me in this topic: I know signs (and thus "special rules") for tractors, cars, trucks, trailers, buses, taxis, caravans, bikes, mopeds (incl. small {{w|Scooter_(motorcycle)|scooters}}), motorbikes, {{w|Motorized_scooter|electro scooters}}, horses, even skates and skateboards (albeit I doubt these are official), but none for (un)motorized verhicles (except one that requires you to kill the engine when halting). So maybe it's an UK issue. Most of the mentioned rules don't affect the right-of-way but regulate access to specific lanes, roads and streets or parking places. Toucan-style crossings are very common here, too (albeit they don't have a special name here, afaik), and are no exception to this as they grant access to the crossing (normally only for pedestrians) for bikes which, without that dedicated bike traffic light, would need to use the "normal" road (and traffic lights) like a car. Which is exactly my point. I'd agree though that those overpowered electro bikes shouldn't be treated as "normal" bikes but more like mopeds. [[User:Elektrizikekswerk|Elektrizikekswerk]] ([[User talk:Elektrizikekswerk|talk]]) 14:24, 27 May 2024 (UTC)
 The thing is, with or without the semi, I feel like Randall wouldn't be able to see well enough to properly ascertain safety, and thus (with or without the truck, with or without waving) he'd have to approach the median anyway, cross the near side anyway, spot the danger guy all on his own. Also, seems weird to have a dedicated left-turn lane WITHOUT a traffic light, at the very least seems weird to have a LINE when there's no light stopping them. If the truck was in front, maybe, since he needs a FAR bigger gap in oncoming traffic... [[User:NiceGuy1|NiceGuy1]] ([[User talk:NiceGuy1|talk]]) 06:40, 19 May 2024 (UTC)

@@ Line 128: / Line 128: @@
 :::: The same rules may be differential in observence between road-users. By even mentioning "dedicated traffic lights for bikes" (which I've never seen, except in the context of a Toucan Crossing) you are in fact implying that "there are different instructions for different traffic", and suggesting that each type of traffic is therefore abiding to those differences. Personally, I think that makes things worse than "everything on the road has to just obey the rules and deal with everything else on the road that is obeying the rules", and encourages entitlement by those who probably don't even know the rules in the first place (or, in the case of drivers, forgot them soon after passing their driving test - today I walked past some workmen repainting a "40" 'reminder' on a recently resurfaced road that's a bit of a rural-ratrun, and we had a bit of a joke that nobody would even pay any attention to their good work). So I don't really know if we can even agree which bit of your point I'd be nitpicking with. Meh, it's probably opinion anyway. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.74.68|162.158.74.68]] 22:31, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
 :::::The comic is about right-of-way, you were nitpicking by mentioning speed limits. People who don't know the rules don't belong on the road. As for dedicated traffic lights for bikes: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Traffic_light#Cycle_signals and (in German) https://www.bussgeldkatalog.de/fahrradampel/ [[User:Elektrizikekswerk|Elektrizikekswerk]] ([[User talk:Elektrizikekswerk|talk]]) 07:20, 27 May 2024 (UTC)
 The thing is, with or without the semi, I feel like Randall wouldn't be able to see well enough to properly ascertain safety, and thus (with or without the truck, with or without waving) he'd have to approach the median anyway, cross the near side anyway, spot the danger guy all on his own. Also, seems weird to have a dedicated left-turn lane WITHOUT a traffic light, at the very least seems weird to have a LINE when there's no light stopping them. If the truck was in front, maybe, since he needs a FAR bigger gap in oncoming traffic... [[User:NiceGuy1|NiceGuy1]] ([[User talk:NiceGuy1|talk]]) 06:40, 19 May 2024 (UTC)