From Newsgroup: uk.net.news.moderation


"JNugent" <JNugent73@mail.com> wrote in message news:muhsfdF9ccqU3@mid.individual.net...

On 04/02/2026 06:52 pm, billy bookcase wrote:

"JNugent" <JNugent73@mail.com> wrote in message
news:muh87oF630qU3@mid.individual.net...

On 04/02/2026 01:35 pm, billy bookcase wrote:

"JNugent" <JNugent73@mail.com> wrote in message
news:mugo1tF3esdU1@mid.individual.net...

On 03/02/2026 06:49 pm, billy bookcase wrote:

"JNugent" <JNugent73@mail.com> wrote in message
news:mueg49Fmi5oU1@mid.individual.net...

On 02/02/2026 01:27 pm, billy bookcase wrote:

"Jethro" <jethro_UK@hotmailbin.com> wrote in message
news:10lpsqi$3he5d$22@dont-email.me...

On Sun, 01 Feb 2026 19:12:41 +0000, billy bookcase wrote:

"Mark Goodge" <usenet@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk> wrote in message >>>>>>>>>> news:0pkunktmcdr6if8jfg3roc93mbqg5ffs1h@4ax.com...

[quoted text muted]

But if all other drivers were truly competent, then those other >>>>>>>>>> drivers
wouldn't need a Special Test, their very own Institute, maybe with a >>>>>>>>>> regular magazine replete with adverts for driving gloves; or that >>>>>>>>>> Special Badge they can mount proudly on the front of their cars, >>>>>>>>>> would
they ?

A Special Badge mounted in the one place where it's effectively >>>>>>>>>> invisible to any cars, they've just overtaken.

I lost interest in *paying* to join the IAM when I discovered that it >>>>>>>>> didn't actually lead to an automatic reduction in premiums. (I suspect
there was a political motive, since doing so would effectively be an >>>>>>>>> admission that the regular driving test was not rigorous enough). >>>>>>>>

Judging by the chap in the London to Bath film, he seemed desparate >>>>>>>> to overtake everything in sight at the first opportunity.

In accordance with good practice of the time: "making progress", as >>>>>>> taught
by
some police forces on driving courses, available to the public.

Well yes. Otherwise it might have been seen as a waste of taxpayer's >>>>>> money, kitting them all out with 3.4 ltr. Jaguars, wouldn't it ?

If that's what you think...

And if they hadn't "made progress", they'd have never have succeeded >>>>>> in catching anyone, would that ?

Why did you snip and ignore one of the main reasons and rationales for >>>>> necessary skill in overtaking,

Because it was totally irrelevant to the point I was making

In the film the IAM driver in the Jag having caught up with the Rapiet >>>> in the outside lane, *immediately* starting flashing his lights and
blowing his horn; rather than waiting for the Rapier driver to look
in his mirrors, and then pull over.

Ah...

...so you don't know why he did what he did and why he didn't expect the >>> driver in front to "pull over".

Because the film was "all about him" ?

Why do you think ?

He needed to come over as "dynamic".

He was behaving normally. You just didn't know that.

Do you only ever overtake on dual carriageways?

Nobody has ever disputed that over-taking is necessary.

However the kind of impatience being shown by the IAM driver
in that film * has no place at all on our British Roads*.

So you say.

There are others who share your view, of course. They must number among
those
who deliberately obstruct overtakers.

Ah right !

So it's all the fault of those other drivers !

When someone pulls out to overtake you, you have no business trying to prevent
the overtake.

That is a complete red herring

The situation we were describing, was one where rather than
*pulling out* the Jag is approaching the Rapier from behind;
their both being in the outside lane.

This seeming inability of yours to follow simple straightforward
arguments, is something which should possibly be of concern to you.*

An observation which would be OT for ULM.



bb

* You have also in the recent past, wrongly accused both Mr Ribbens and
myself of snipping material from posts



--- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2