News:

Thanks to everyone for the feedback on what errors you encountered from the forum database changes made in Fall 2023. Let us know if you discover anymore.

Main Menu

New "Halte texto" (Text Stop) signs to be posted in Québec

Started by Dr Frankenstein, June 24, 2015, 06:01:10 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Dr Frankenstein

According to the latest revision of the Tome V ("Traffic Control Devices") manual in Quebec, the province seems to have followed its neighbour New York's footsteps and will most probably post "Halte texto" (Text Stop) signs along its highways.

http://www.rsr.mtq.gouv.qc.ca/Dispositifs/Details.aspx?cid=24398&che=INDCT-INFRM&cat=INFRM&


SignGeek101

I don't really know if this will work. Here in Manitoba, apparently it's 5 demerits and a hefty fine for texting while driving. And people still do it...  :banghead:

These stops may help, but if people want to text while they drive, they will do it, no matter the penalty.

briantroutman

For the 18-30 demographic, the interval for text stops would need to be more like 500 ft.

Duke87

Quote from: SignGeek101 on June 24, 2015, 07:09:57 PM
I don't really know if this will work. Here in Manitoba, apparently it's 5 demerits and a hefty fine for texting while driving. And people still do it...  :banghead:

These stops may help, but if people want to text while they drive, they will do it, no matter the penalty.

I squarely blame the expectation that texts should be responded to instantly. If I am driving and I hear my phone go doodleoo, I am probably not even going to pull over to check it. I will check it the next time I stop and if that isn't for another couple hours, oh well, whoever is trying to get a hold of me can wait.

I don't see it so much as "if people want to text while they drive, they will do it" so much as "if it is socially acceptable for people to text while they drive, they will do it". You know how there was the old slogan about "friends don't let friends drive drunk"? Methinks we need that sort of campaign. Friends don't let friends text while driving. The only reason people text while driving in the first place is because of peer pressure, so the best cure is to turn that force in the other direction.

As for the signs at hand, they do serve as a reminder to people that they should stop if they want to send a text. Alone they don't do much but as part of a greater social awareness campaign they fit right in.
If you always take the same road, you will never see anything new.

vdeane

It's too bad that social engineering campaign isn't happening.  The people in power are thinking all about laws and punishments.  They forget that DUIs are less prevalent now not because of checkpoints, MADD, enforcement, or anything else, but because the culture has changed.
Please note: All comments here represent my own personal opinion and do not reflect the official position of NYSDOT or its affiliates.

Pete from Boston


Quote from: vdeane on June 28, 2015, 03:34:28 PM
It's too bad that social engineering campaign isn't happening.  The people in power are thinking all about laws and punishments.  They forget that DUIs are less prevalent now not because of checkpoints, MADD, enforcement, or anything else, but because the culture has changed.

Do you think checkpoints, MADD, and enforcement had nothing to do with that cultural change?  Anti-DUI campaigns ramped up particularly during the 1980s to a point where people were bombarded and indoctrinated with the message that this is not a good idea.

SignGeek101

Here's the one in NY (I think, the page is in French):



OP post link is broken (seems like) by the way.

Dr Frankenstein

Quote from: SignGeek101 on June 28, 2015, 11:15:19 PM
Here's the one in NY (I think, the page is in French):

Yup. That's NY.

Quote from: SignGeek101 on June 28, 2015, 11:15:19 PMOP post link is broken (seems like) by the way.
Open, close, then reopen.

vdeane

Quote from: Pete from Boston on June 28, 2015, 09:05:58 PM

Quote from: vdeane on June 28, 2015, 03:34:28 PM
It's too bad that social engineering campaign isn't happening.  The people in power are thinking all about laws and punishments.  They forget that DUIs are less prevalent now not because of checkpoints, MADD, enforcement, or anything else, but because the culture has changed.

Do you think checkpoints, MADD, and enforcement had nothing to do with that cultural change?  Anti-DUI campaigns ramped up particularly during the 1980s to a point where people were bombarded and indoctrinated with the message that this is not a good idea.
I think the reduction in DUIs is mostly due to my generation being raised with different values than baby boomers.
Please note: All comments here represent my own personal opinion and do not reflect the official position of NYSDOT or its affiliates.

Pete from Boston


Quote from: vdeane on June 29, 2015, 06:30:01 PM
Quote from: Pete from Boston on June 28, 2015, 09:05:58 PM

Quote from: vdeane on June 28, 2015, 03:34:28 PM
It's too bad that social engineering campaign isn't happening.  The people in power are thinking all about laws and punishments.  They forget that DUIs are less prevalent now not because of checkpoints, MADD, enforcement, or anything else, but because the culture has changed.

Do you think checkpoints, MADD, and enforcement had nothing to do with that cultural change?  Anti-DUI campaigns ramped up particularly during the 1980s to a point where people were bombarded and indoctrinated with the message that this is not a good idea.
I think the reduction in DUIs is mostly due to my generation being raised with different values than baby boomers.

You were not around for the wave I discussed above.  It helped shape the values of your generation (and the folks between you and baby boomers) with regard to driving drunk.

Pete from Boston


Quote from: Duke87 on June 28, 2015, 01:28:06 AM
I squarely blame the expectation that texts should be responded to instantly.

Funny, I don't see this expectation.  I find the hope with texts is usually that one gets back soon, depending on the text, but not immediately.  If people need immediate answers, in my experience, they call.  Lowest on the urgency list is email.

vdeane

I think of the uses as the following:
-Call: Long conversation
-Text: quick question or remark
-Email: longer or less urgent question/remark/etc.

For me, the difference between the call and a text isn't the urgency, it's the complexity/duration of whatever information is to be communicated.  Still though, if I'm driving, I won't answer; I MIGHT look at a text if I'm stopped at a long light, but unless it's REALLY urgent, replies (or reading if not at a long light) waits until after I stop driving.
Please note: All comments here represent my own personal opinion and do not reflect the official position of NYSDOT or its affiliates.

Pete from Boston


Quote from: vdeane on June 30, 2015, 01:50:02 PM
I think of the uses as the following:
-Call: Long conversation
-Text: quick question or remark
-Email: longer or less urgent question/remark/etc.

For me, the difference between the call and a text isn't the urgency, it's the complexity/duration of whatever information is to be communicated.  Still though, if I'm driving, I won't answer; I MIGHT look at a text if I'm stopped at a long light, but unless it's REALLY urgent, replies (or reading if not at a long light) waits until after I stop driving.

During my work day, an email means "Read this when you have a moment, no rush."  A text message means "Don't stop what you're doing, but I have a question/comment for you."  A phone call means "I need to speak to you more or less right now."

These expectations vary all over the place, which is why communication conflicts have grown as communication methods have.

dcbjms

Looking at the MTQ sign database, some of those Halte Texto signs also have Wi-Fi symbols on them.  For example:
http://www.rsr.mtq.gouv.qc.ca/Dispositifs/Details.aspx?cid=24417&che=INDCT-INFRM&cat=INFRM&p=1&ca=PetiteVignette


I wonder if there's going to be a difference between the non-Wi-Fi text stops and the Wi-Fi ones?

briantroutman

Regarding the priority of emails, texts, and calls, I've found that attitudes vary widely from person to person. Sometimes someone will specify a preference, like "If you want to reach me quickly, don't call; send an email"  ...or vice versa.

For most people under about 40, calling is often the least successful method of contact. Many in that group seem to decline all incoming calls unless they're specifically expected. And even if they're not intentionally declining calls, there are the myriad situations (in a meeting, in class, in a noisy environment) where people can't answer calls or listen to voicemail, but they could possibly text back.

About the compulsion to text and be constantly active in social media, my theory is this: People have fewer real friends and meaningful relationships, and so they're trying to replace that aspect of their lives by having a greater number of distant friends, sorta friends, and Internet-only friends–with whom they primarily or exclusively interact with electronically. But because of the inherent weakness of these relationships, the people in them–particularly the follower type–are insecure about losing them, so they feel the need to keep the conversation going and respond to all texts right away.

I'm not too far out of my teenage years, but it's startling to see today's teenagers' attitudes toward friends and social media. When I was in high school, I had compact group of close friends, and when we weren't together, I happily did my own thing. But to people of that age today, particularly girls, it's as if perpetually posting to social media and texting their friends is the only meaning their lives have at all.

Duke87

Quote from: Pete from Boston on June 29, 2015, 06:56:25 PM

Quote from: Duke87 on June 28, 2015, 01:28:06 AM
I squarely blame the expectation that texts should be responded to instantly.

Funny, I don't see this expectation.

I see it in so many ways. I've seen people who need to respond instantly when their boss contacts them or they might get yelled at. I've seen people have group conversations via text and need to say something at a particular point in time or lose the opportunity because the conversation moves on without them if they don't. I've seen people stress like hell over when the proper moment to text that cute person who gave them their number is. I've seen people need to coordinate where exactly they're meeting their friend as they're driving there, so guess how that happens.

And I've even just seen fast-paced, type A lifestyle make people think it's rude to not respond instantly. Even I occasionally get concerned about this when handling work related matters - but the difference is that I'm the type who has no qualms being a little rude and obnoxious if I believe people's expectations of me are unrealistic. If anyone gets on my case as to why I didn't get back to them quickly, I feel perfectly entitled to say "I can't answer my phone while I'm driving" and refuse to budge on that.
If you always take the same road, you will never see anything new.

lordsutch

Quote from: dcbjms on June 30, 2015, 04:21:32 PM
Looking at the MTQ sign database, some of those Halte Texto signs also have Wi-Fi symbols on them.  For example:
http://www.rsr.mtq.gouv.qc.ca/Dispositifs/Details.aspx?cid=24417&che=INDCT-INFRM&cat=INFRM&p=1&ca=PetiteVignette


I wonder if there's going to be a difference between the non-Wi-Fi text stops and the Wi-Fi ones?
I'm guessing the ones with a WiFi symbol will have (presumably free) WiFi hotspots available and those that don't won't. :)

Ren97

Quote from: lordsutch on July 01, 2015, 01:52:02 AM
Quote from: dcbjms on June 30, 2015, 04:21:32 PM
Looking at the MTQ sign database, some of those Halte Texto signs also have Wi-Fi symbols on them.  For example:
http://www.rsr.mtq.gouv.qc.ca/Dispositifs/Details.aspx?cid=24417&che=INDCT-INFRM&cat=INFRM&p=1&ca=PetiteVignette


I wonder if there's going to be a difference between the non-Wi-Fi text stops and the Wi-Fi ones?
I'm guessing the ones with a WiFi symbol will have (presumably free) WiFi hotspots available and those that don't won't. :)

Spot on. That's what the sign directory says.

J N Winkler

There was definitely a cultural change that occurred in the 1980's with regard to drinking and driving.  Before then, it was considered normal to drink from an open beer can while driving; now that not only is illegal but is also considered socially completely unacceptable.

In regard to cellphone use in a passenger car in general, these are the rules I try to follow:

*  If I am driving on familiar roads, the cellphone goes in my trunk, to reduce my exposure to smash-and-grab thievery if I decide to leave my phone in the car for a brief errand stop.

*  If I am driving on unfamiliar roads, the cellphone goes somewhere inside the passenger compartment that is within reach, but isn't consulted except when I am parked out of traffic, not just stopped.  I do not want to have to respond to traffic movement (e.g., while waiting for a light to change) but I also don't want to be approached and asked to explain myself.  I usually park at the foot of a large parking lot, or at the curb on a subdivision road in front of a house that has no lights on at the front and nobody in the front yard.

As regards social expectations surrounding texts, I have found that senders usually expect them to function as a touch-to-the-shoulder attention-getter when there is no reason to suspect the recipient is otherwise occupied.  I have used texts in this way.  On the other hand, I retain the discretion to choose the timing of any reply I send, so I cannot reasonably object to others doing the same.

To an extent, I calibrate my style to the person I am texting with, as some people fear they are being intentionally ignored when reply texts don't come immediately, and become quite anxious.  Texting is also not a completely reliable form of communication since some providers drop texts (I have had this happen at least five times with someone with whom I have exchanged about 450 texts over the course of a year), so there is a background expectation of heard/understood/acknowledged reply texts even if there is nothing substantive to say.

As regards the respective social expectations of voice calls, texts, and emails, there are some people out there who have a smartphone as their sole data access device (no computer or broadband subscription at home) and this has to be taken into account as well.

As for text stops in Québec and New York, I wonder if provision of that amenity has to do with traffic density.  I can see it being much more appealing to work with a phone behind the wheel (and not just when the car is parked) when it is much more difficult to rejoin the traffic stream once you have dropped out of it.  Text stops are unknown in Kansas despite a full ban on texting while driving.
"It is necessary to spend a hundred lire now to save a thousand lire later."--Piero Puricelli, explaining the need for a first-class road system to Benito Mussolini

Duke87

Text stops aren't an "amenity". These signs (at least in New York) only point to existing rest areas and service plazas, as a recommendation that drivers use them for this purpose.

One thing the signs have done, though, is significantly increased the distance in advance that rest areas are signed. It used to be you got a sign one mile in advance for rest areas, and only anything further than that for service plazas. Now the standard form on DOT maintained roads is "it can wait / text stop / 5 miles" followed by "text stop / rest area / 2 miles", the same for 1 mile and the sign at the ramp itself, and then a "text stop" tab over the gore point sign.
If you always take the same road, you will never see anything new.

Sykotyk

Quote from: Duke87 on July 05, 2015, 01:48:07 PM
Text stops aren't an "amenity". These signs (at least in New York) only point to existing rest areas and service plazas, as a recommendation that drivers use them for this purpose.

One thing the signs have done, though, is significantly increased the distance in advance that rest areas are signed. It used to be you got a sign one mile in advance for rest areas, and only anything further than that for service plazas. Now the standard form on DOT maintained roads is "it can wait / text stop / 5 miles" followed by "text stop / rest area / 2 miles", the same for 1 mile and the sign at the ramp itself, and then a "text stop" tab over the gore point sign.

They've basically repurposed rest areas and picnic areas for a place for texters to pull over. Considering it's just the cost of the signage, that's not a bad thing. Will it work? Maybe.



Opinions expressed here on belong solely to the poster and do not represent or reflect the opinions or beliefs of AARoads, its creators and/or associates.