Originally Posted by
noisebeam
I have no problem I am only surprised that when giving a suggestion instead of either ignoring it or saying 'Thanks I'll have to give it a try' I get a 'That will never work so I will never try it' which made me wonder if I was not communicating well. The 'different approach' makes no sense in that to put a foot down one has to be stopped or nearly so before the x-driver takes action which eliminates the benefit of the stop signal which is to avoid that delay of the x-driver taking action. It works so well I have to share it.
Originally Posted by
noisebeam
The idea is that when you signal a right turn early (not just when turning) the driver entering the roadway can decide to turn into the roadway assuming you will be turning. It doesn't slow a turn. The idea is you signal before turning not while turning.
I also signal right so that drivers behind me know I am slowing to turn.
Ultimately, I think we have a philosophical difference here. I'm far too focused on avoiding hazards from all directions to worry about the second or so delay that might be caused by my not throwing a courtesy signal. In the four-way stop situation, you're now suggesting that a cyclist has more of a responsibility to signal the driver on the other side of the intersection of our intention to stop than a driver has. You can't see brake lights from the front. I don't think there's any thing wrong with making people wait at the intersection until they confirm the other vehicle is going to stop, as a driver I do it all the time without any thought. I've found that cars roll stop signs at trafficked intersections with about the same frequency.
If I throw a right turn signal too early, it won't be seen by the driver who's pulling into the intersection. If I'm not signalling timely for him to see it, I don't need to slow much to turn right, so there really is no info that a driver behind me needs.
.