cyclists turned right when i overtook

kraken776

wapow wrote: »

Why did everyone turn on the OP? I didn't read it all but I can guess what happened...


No one took into account the OP, in his first post, specifically said "the cyclist was wearing a headcam, can I request the video legally" (said to something of that effect)


If the driver was at fault, they would be worried about this headcam.


Therefore I trust the OP in that they made a calculated decision and it didn't turn out the way it should. I am also leaning towards the cyclist being at fault. (Did the OP made a post saying it was all his fault)


Therefore, the OP was correct that there are idiots on this thread, the typical MSE "Thanks" gang that high five each other with every comment.


Go away. We don't need 33 pages of your drivel. I'd like to hear from the OP as to how this all went ahead.

Mercdriver wrote: »

If you can't be arsed to read the whole thread, you have no place making judgements about those who post in it. Grow up. I hope you never end up being called for Jury service. You'd need an attention span of longer than 10 minutes.

I have noticed that you did not give any reason for disagreeing with what wapow said.
Instead you have speculated that he has not read the whole thread, told him to grown up and told him he should not be called for jury service.

Making personal attacks like these makes you look bad, not him because it highlights the fact that you dont have any rational argument to support your point of view.
Your attempt to make wapow look bad has failed and backfired.

Joe_Horner

I'm honestly beginning to think that thee big gaps in activity by krackers is down to whoever's programming it going off and updating it's AI engine.

We must be onto Krackers 6.1 by now and it still can't pass the Turing test.

BeenThroughItAll

You know what, I'm starting to think it's easier if we all just say we completely agree with him, just so he'll go away and stop dragging this shoite up every week or two.

Car_54

kraken776 wrote: »

I did make in clear in my OP that i moved all the way into the opposite lane.

Just as you made it clear in a subsequent post that it didn't happen.

silverwhistle

Oh god, the Kraken wakes...

tho_2

Richard53 wrote: »

I don't need to check anything, having been a follower of this thread from the start. He said he did, then he said he didn't, and then he started getting hostile with people who said he did, claiming that he had been very clear in several posts that he was only seeking theoretical answers to something that might have happened but didn't. The OP has claimed both scenarios with equal conviction. I think the balance of probabilities is that an accident nearly happened but didn't, but the OP got as irate as if it had and needed to vent. Or something. It's hilarious, whatever, but any comments dealing with the substance of the 'incident' are pretty much unnecessary.

I've read it all too and I go the other way. He had a accident, came on here looking for justification for his argument, failed to get any, then backed out of it, far too aggressively. I reckon because the cyclist didn't make a claim. The quotes from the insurance company are pretty specific to make up for a "hypothetical" Quite why he digs it up every two weeks are another mystery. Let it go and maybe not overtake in a 30 coming up to a traffic control measure (For what its worth I put it at 50/50, I think the cyclist was probably moving to the right to leave the left lane free for Kraken to undertake and get through the gap, but didn't look, but I dont feel in the situation Krakens overtake was particularly safe). But i do agree. Its hilarious!