- bicycle riders attaching 1.5m sticks extending to the side of their bike and with a flag at the end of it.

- bicycle riders wearing no helmet

- bicycle riders swerving into your lane without looking, because their lane is occupied by a parked vehicle.

- bicycle riders passing all stopped traffic at the traffic light without giving the cars the 1.5m gap they expect to get from drivers.

- bicycle riders passing all stopped traffic at the traffic light then getting onto the pedestrian walkway only to get to the other side of the traffic light, then getting back onto the road.

- bicycle riders moving at 45 - 50km/hr

- electric scooters on the main roads

yes, you get the idea... riders of things on two wheels on the busy roads are annoying... mostly because they do not pay anything for the roads (which are paid from the petrol tax not from income tax, which they might or might not be paying - while the petrol tax is definitely paid, as you cannot avoid it!

- electric vehicles using the roads for free - that is a whole new topic - they should pay RUC exactly like a diesel car - how are we going to pay for the roads when govt gets it its way and say 50% of people drive electric cars in 10 years ???

- motorbike riders using hazard lights when they pass all stopped traffic at a traffic light. Why do they do that? Does any of them really believe there is any car driver out there who does not know the motorbike riders are a hazard? Judging by how they ride and behave in traffic, they have no idea of rules. At last they stop at the traffic light, not like the bicycles.

- the stupid - stupid idea of having one lane split into two lanes at a traffic light with both lanes going through the intersection then getting back to one lane. If there is ANY logical explanation to that I am really keen to hear it. But I do not believe there is any. I have nothing against multiple lanes at an intersection but the number of lanes going straight through should be the same as the number of lanes for the 200m before and after the intersection. The additional lanes should be "left turn only" or "right turn only"; This way the intersections would not be used as opportunity to simply get 2-3 places up in the que - because this is the only thing they create. Personally I always try to be on the right hand lane (center) because if someone tries to pass me on the first lane and the dotted line has finished (which means we are back to one lane) and something happens - then he tried to pass me on the left, which is illegal and that driver is liable. Bringing the "merge like a zip" into discussion is kind of childish, as it does NOT apply here, it applies to the motorway on-ramps where you HAVE to do that in order to carry on, not at the traffic light where you CHOSE to do that because you want to get 2-3 places up in the que... Plus that the merge like a zip is always mentioned in relation to motorway on-ramps, I have never ever saw such sigh in a "standard" intersection, which means there is no expectation to be applied in that situation. And after all it is a recommendation, not a rule. You cannot be formally punished or penalized for not following a recommendation. If it would be so important, they would have made it into law.

Unfortunately the "option" to get rid of all these things is to get a tent and live in the bush...

aucklander:

 

<.. traffic rant...>

 

User name checks out... 😊

Damn all those children. 

They do things like stick flags on their bikes and ride into traffic. 

They lack adult judgement and act without thinking. 

They get in the way on roundabouts and are too short to see. 

They laugh and make other unpleasant noises as they go past. 

They go too fast or too slow. 

They don’t follow the rules I make up for them. 

yes, you get the idea... children on two wheels on the busy roads are annoying... mostly because they do not pay anything for the roads (which are paid from the petrol tax not from school tax, which they might or might not be paying - while the petrol tax is definitely paid, as you cannot avoid it! Damn children!

aucklander:

 

yes, you get the idea... riders of things on two wheels on the busy roads are annoying... mostly because they do not pay anything for the roads (which are paid from the petrol tax not from income tax, which they might or might not be paying - while the petrol tax is definitely paid, as you cannot avoid it!.

My employer is about to notify all external parties that they can no longer contact us on the email address they've been using for a decade, but need to change to a new one. This is not due to any technical limitation; it's simply because a project manager decided that it's time for a change.

Oh, and as an employee, when did I find out about this change? Start of business today. And when does the change occur? Close of business today.

People who feel they are entitled to be the only one on the road at the expense of all other road users.

Whether you like it or not, roads are getting increasingly more and more crowded with any and all users.  Sure it sucks to be inconvenienced by another road user but realistically the time difference is seconds at most.  Why stress yourself into an early grave over something you cannot ever hope to control.

Having 5 Facebook adverts rejected "for contravening our alcohol advertising policy" when the adverts

1) Are not for alcohol

2) Do not mention alcohol

3) Do not contain images of alcohol

4) Have exactly nothing whatsoever to do with alcohol, places where it is made, served, consumed or otherwise!

Maybe the policy is that ads must be for alcohol!

Behodar:

 

Maybe the policy is that ads must be for alcohol!

 

It's ridiculous. I thought these tech systems were supposed to be clever. How can adverts not for anything associated with alcohol and not featuring it in any way at all be found to contravene an alcohol policy by supposedly state of the art IT systems?!

Behodar:

 

My employer is about to notify all external parties that they can no longer contact us on the email address they've been using for a decade, but need to change to a new one. This is not due to any technical limitation; it's simply because a project manager decided that it's time for a change.

 

Oh, and as an employee, when did I find out about this change? Start of business today. And when does the change occur? Close of business today.

 

I hope that every single one of them ignore that request, or call up to validate the change is legit. Because to just start emailing a new address about something you have been doing for some time is an idiotic thing to do. Perhaps there is some logic to this and they want to see who take the bait?

Geektastic:

 

Behodar:

 

Maybe the policy is that ads must be for alcohol!

 

 

 

 

It's ridiculous. I thought these tech systems were supposed to be clever. How can adverts not for anything associated with alcohol and not featuring it in any way at all be found to contravene an alcohol policy by supposedly state of the art IT systems?!

 

Because one of the words in the ad will be used for alcohol in the small part of the US where the person that chose the words is from, so because of idiot US company it gets applied worldwide.

Friend has a 2 week facebook jail for saying how their fireplace needed the wetback replaced, because to a US centric company that's a bad word, for here its a water heater.

richms:

 

Because one of the words in the ad will be used for alcohol in the small part of the US where the person that chose the words is from, so because of idiot US company it gets applied worldwide.

 

Friend has a 2 week facebook jail for saying how their fireplace needed the wetback replaced, because to a US centric company that's a bad word, for here its a water heater.

 

That reminds me of a story a well-travelled friend told me. She was on the last leg of a lengthy air journey when she was seated next to an American lady. Engaging in conversation, she mentioned the Indian people she had been staying with. The American gently admonished her, saying it was no longer correct to refer to them as indians. My friend tried to explain several times that she was referring to people of Indian nationality but the American was having none of it. They are to be referred to as 'Native Americans', she insisted. My friend finally gave up.

Even then, it depends on the individual person. I know an American Indian and she calls herself Indian, asks others to call her Indian, and reckons that "Native American" is political correctness run amok.

Edit: I just remembered another story. A black British celebrity (I can't remember who) was being interviewed in the US, and the interviewer called him "African American".

"I'm not American; just call me black."

"I can't do that; my audience will say I'm racist."

Geektastic:

 

Behodar:

 

Maybe the policy is that ads must be for alcohol!

 

 

 

 

It's ridiculous. I thought these tech systems were supposed to be clever. 

 

They are, but they're programmed by people, who, let's say, vary.