Re: OT - Those *#?%$^& Drivers With Cellphones

On Sun, 04 Jun 2006 15:45:33 -0700, jk <klessig@xxxxxxx> wrote:
Dave Hinz <DaveHinz@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

So, I have to answer the phone when it rings, you see. That's what "on
call" means in this context.

No that's what you chose it to mean. And I am sure you will chose to
also say it has to be answered by the 1st ring, perhaps before.

Why do you pretend you know what my situation is?

And now you presume to judge the quality of my ability to diagnose a
technical situation based on an absence of information.

Yes, as can any body else, who is reading your posting here, where you
clearly are unable to provide a valid argument about why that call
can't wait until you pull over.

I answered that already. Pulling over in traffic, is more dangerous
than flipping open a phone. This isn't a difficult concept.

And you ignore the fact that there IS a complementary cost.

"Try the peanuts, they're complementary..."

Yes, your >pattern is clear.

So Is yours.

Yes, I don't accept unfounded statements from people who pretend they
know what they're talking about, you're right.

[Or if you are, then you are proving you are unsafe when talking on
the cell phone]

See previous.

Either the call is worth you full attention, or it is not. If it
wasn't, then it wasn't so important after all.

Nothing takes my full attention. It's not complicated to walk and chew
gum at the same time, at least not for most people.

If I choose to stay employed, I need to choose to answer the phone. I'm
not losing my job because some random entity on Usenet thinks I'm not
qualified to (gasp!) answer the phone _and_ not kill someone at the same
time.

So pull over and then call back.

More dangerous than opening the phone.

It is more likely than not that your
company actually has a policy, that requires that any way, at least if
they are as "major" as you seem to imply.

Nothing to "imply" about it. I don't care if you believe the volume
nubmers or not, doesn't matter a bit to me. Wouldn't matter if I was
part of a 3-guy shop, that doesn't change the fact that opening a phone
to answer it, is less dangerous than dodging across lanes of traffic to
pull over to answer the call.

And what happens if (Gasp) you happen to be driving through a dead
spot, or all the channels in that cell are in use at that time, when
the call comes in and it doesn't get answered.

Then the _secondary_ on call guy gets called. As a courtesy to your
coworkers, that is a situation to be avoided.

Again it is more convenient for you. YOu do not HAVE to answer it.
YOu could pull over safely, and then do a call back.

Sure, I could. What would the _real_ value be of that though?
I mean, you seem to be a "do something, anything!" kind of person,
rather than a "do what makes sense" kind of person, based on this and a
few other interactions we've had. If it's not going to accomplish
anything, why do it?

Never said YOU had to or even should.

Oh, right, you said "could", not "should". Yeah sure whatever,
word-games boy, I'll agree that I could. I also state that I won't.
How's that?

Perhaps you should learn to
read rather than jump to conclusions. I only took issue with your
statement that there were people who "HAD" to answer their phones in
traffic.

Yeah, word games is all you have at this point, I see.

I think it has something to do with working in an industry which also
didn't exist in this manner 20 years ago. Doesn't matter where it came
from, it exists now. You claimed nobody had to answer a phone, I
provided a counterexample.

No, you haven't. All you did was provide and example of why you think
such a counter example exists.

Seems like a pretty clear counterexample to me.

On which, you have no knowledge to base you conclusion.
The "yabuts" appear to be all yours. "Yabut I might get fired, if I
wait till I pull over."

Pulling over is safer than flipping open a phone? Do tell! Show me a
study on the topic and I'll consider your theory.

A cellphone
doesn't magically turn someone into a bad driver. If someone is a bad
driver with a cellphone, they're a bad driver without it.

Yeah and next you will say that a Fifth of scotch doesn't magically
turn some one into a bad driver either.

No, as even you know, that's an entirely different situation.

Do you have _anything_ of interest on this topic, or is it just more of
your usual? Don't bother writing a whole bunch if it's just more of the
same, because it's really not worth the effort. I'm sure your little
twists of phrase and carefully constructed whatevers are oh, so clever,
but you stopped having anything useful to say on the topic a couple
posts ago, far as I can tell.


.

Relevant Pages

  • [GIT PULL] please pull infiniband.git
    ... Linus, please pull from ... Add a driver for NetEffect RNICs ... IB/ehca: Prevent sending UD packets to QP0 ... Remove a misleading debug print ...
    (Linux-Kernel)
  • Re: Democrats: Truthers
    ... to pull it off and his adminstration certainly isn't competent enough. ... Present a misrepresentation of the opponent's position, refute it, ... and pretend that the opponent's actual position has been refuted. ... Present someone who defends a position poorly as the defender, ...
    (rec.sport.football.college)
  • Re: Hang up and friggen drive!!!
    ... My husband is a driver and I have flat out told him if I catch him talking ... He knows it is an emergency and to pull ... But not only that - it is against company policy. ... caught on the cell - it is immediate termination. ...
    (misc.transport.trucking)
  • Re: Nerves of steel...
    ... >>> What type of driver gets under your skin, ... > I pull trailers as short as 42' to as long as 80'. ... > I pull wide loads too, like the one I pulled on my birthday. ... The permit ...
    (misc.transport.trucking)
  • Re: Am I Invisible Or What?
    ... to the local amenity farm is on the left, see car positioned to pull ... Driver ... The shock will make "young mum" more careful in future, ... any luck the police will do her for careless driving. ...
    (uk.rec.motorcycles)