Lane Closure "ettiquite"

[thspfc]

Yes, you're an a-hole. Anything else I can help you with?

Ugh. Literally first reply. Of course.

I tend to merge early, but then feel frustrated at all the queue jumpers that keep going by to get to the head of the merge.

I may get seriously delayed by 20 or 30 cars that go by me.

Then maybe you should unlock free will and join them?

I tend to merge early, but then feel frustrated at all the queue jumpers that keep going by to get to the head of the merge.

I may get seriously delayed by 20 or 30 cars that go by me.

So you chose to jump the queue at a certain point. It's still jumping. You just chose to do it further back.

How did you come to that conclusion?

He said he tends to merge early. Same thing as jumping the queue. And if he merged before there was a queue, no fault blaming others for not doing the same.

I still don't get your logic.

I get it just fine! If you were at any point traveling in the closing lane with the continuing lane backed up - even for 50 feet - you must have "jumped the queue" to some extent.

I hate queue jumpers like you!

[74/171FAN]

Please stop with the personal attacks.  -Mark

[Beltway]

I tend to merge early, but then feel frustrated at all the queue jumpers that keep going by to get to the head of the merge.
I may get seriously delayed by 20 or 30 cars that go by me.

Then maybe you should unlock free will and join them?

Is that ethical?

[kalvado]

I tend to merge early, but then feel frustrated at all the queue jumpers that keep going by to get to the head of the merge.
I may get seriously delayed by 20 or 30 cars that go by me.

Then maybe you should unlock free will and join them?

Is that ethical?

The most ethical solution seems to be the one taking everyone to the same page. A lot of this discussion is about people taking advantage of those acting in good faith under the color of "right thing to do", in a situation where uniform and predictable behavior is desired.

It has to originate from the DOT or similar authority, on a soft force side. Like one mentioned in NJ - no advanced warnings, so everyone is on the same page.  Can also be something along the line of "do not merge until directed", possibly with solid lines painted as part of a long term closure, for a single midroad lane instead of having open and closed one.
Of course that's more work and doesn't help with unexpected closures..

[Beltway]

Is that ethical?

The most ethical solution seems to be the one taking everyone to the same page. A lot of this discussion is about people taking advantage of those acting in good faith under the color of "right thing to do", in a situation where uniform and predictable behavior is desired.
It has to originate from the DOT or similar authority, on a soft force side. Like one mentioned in NJ - no advanced warnings, so everyone is on the same page.  Can also be something along the line of "do not merge until directed", possibly with solid lines painted as part of a long term closure, for a single midroad lane instead of having open and closed one.
Of course that's more work and doesn't help with unexpected closures..

My main encounters are not with construction lane closures.

They are with several locations where a 2-lane freeway to freeway ramp drops to one lane before merging into the other freeway.

[kalvado]

Is that ethical?

The most ethical solution seems to be the one taking everyone to the same page. A lot of this discussion is about people taking advantage of those acting in good faith under the color of "right thing to do", in a situation where uniform and predictable behavior is desired.
It has to originate from the DOT or similar authority, on a soft force side. Like one mentioned in NJ - no advanced warnings, so everyone is on the same page.  Can also be something along the line of "do not merge until directed", possibly with solid lines painted as part of a long term closure, for a single midroad lane instead of having open and closed one.
Of course that's more work and doesn't help with unexpected closures..

My main encounters are not with construction lane closures.

They are with several locations where a 2-lane freeway to freeway ramp drops to one lane before merging into the other freeway.

do you have an example in mind? Those may be tricky depending on how the merge works.

[pderocco]

Is that ethical?

The most ethical solution seems to be the one taking everyone to the same page. A lot of this discussion is about people taking advantage of those acting in good faith under the color of "right thing to do", in a situation where uniform and predictable behavior is desired.
It has to originate from the DOT or similar authority, on a soft force side. Like one mentioned in NJ - no advanced warnings, so everyone is on the same page.  Can also be something along the line of "do not merge until directed", possibly with solid lines painted as part of a long term closure, for a single midroad lane instead of having open and closed one.
Of course that's more work and doesn't help with unexpected closures..

My main encounters are not with construction lane closures.

They are with several locations where a 2-lane freeway to freeway ramp drops to one lane before merging into the other freeway.

do you have an example in mind? Those may be tricky depending on how the merge works.

In my experience in California, most multi-lane ramps drop to one lane before merging into the main line. And people instinctively do a zipper merge on them.

[kalvado]

Is that ethical?

The most ethical solution seems to be the one taking everyone to the same page. A lot of this discussion is about people taking advantage of those acting in good faith under the color of "right thing to do", in a situation where uniform and predictable behavior is desired.
It has to originate from the DOT or similar authority, on a soft force side. Like one mentioned in NJ - no advanced warnings, so everyone is on the same page.  Can also be something along the line of "do not merge until directed", possibly with solid lines painted as part of a long term closure, for a single midroad lane instead of having open and closed one.
Of course that's more work and doesn't help with unexpected closures..

My main encounters are not with construction lane closures.

They are with several locations where a 2-lane freeway to freeway ramp drops to one lane before merging into the other freeway.

do you have an example in mind? Those may be tricky depending on how the merge works.

In my experience in California, most multi-lane ramps drop to one lane before merging into the main line. And people instinctively do a zipper merge on them.

I can think of multiple different configurations within same idea, some working better than others.
i can bring some local fairly messy examples, where situation is complicated by overall complexity of the traffic pattern between multiple exits, not only lane configuration of specific ramp.

[pderocco]

The whole problem could be solved by just telling people that there's a merge ahead, but never telling them which lane will be dropped.

[kalvado]

The whole problem could be solved by just telling people that there's a merge ahead, but never telling them which lane will be dropped.

If that's an emergency closing, yes
If that's construction on a commuter - heavy road, no so much.

[Scott5114]

The whole problem could be solved by just telling people that there's a merge ahead, but never telling them which lane will be dropped.

Or by having both lanes funnel into one that straddles the painted lane line, so that neither of them is the continuing lane.

The reason zipper merge doesn't work is because of drivers who see the road as a first-come-first-served queue, like at a grocery store. It isn't. If there is nobody who can say their lane is the One True Lane and they are Better Than Everyone Else because they were in The One True Lane first, then the queue narrative entirely falls apart and they have to default to, y'know, doing what they were supposed to.

[Max Rockatansky]

We aren't going to go into a side tangent about what "ethical highway driving" is?  I was looking forward to some analysis of what "lawful evil" might look like.

[kalvado]

The whole problem could be solved by just telling people that there's a merge ahead, but never telling them which lane will be dropped.

Or by having both lanes funnel into one that straddles the painted lane line, so that neither of them is the continuing lane.

The reason zipper merge doesn't work is because of drivers who see the road as a first-come-first-served queue, like at a grocery store. It isn't. If there is nobody who can say their lane is the One True Lane and they are Better Than Everyone Else because they were in The One True Lane first, then the queue narrative entirely falls apart and they have to default to, y'know, doing what they were supposed to.

You may want to re-read the vehicle and traffic law, or whatever it is called in whatever is your current state, regarding lane change, merge,  and right of way on roads with multiple lanes.

[cockroachking]

The whole problem could be solved by just telling people that there's a merge ahead, but never telling them which lane will be dropped.

Or by having both lanes funnel into one that straddles the painted lane line, so that neither of them is the continuing lane.

The reason zipper merge doesn't work is because of drivers who see the road as a first-come-first-served queue, like at a grocery store. It isn't. If there is nobody who can say their lane is the One True Lane and they are Better Than Everyone Else because they were in The One True Lane first, then the queue narrative entirely falls apart and they have to default to, y'know, doing what they were supposed to.

Similarly, see the Maryland method. Even though one lane geometrically ends, it is treated as described above.

[Scott5114]

The whole problem could be solved by just telling people that there's a merge ahead, but never telling them which lane will be dropped.

Or by having both lanes funnel into one that straddles the painted lane line, so that neither of them is the continuing lane.

The reason zipper merge doesn't work is because of drivers who see the road as a first-come-first-served queue, like at a grocery store. It isn't. If there is nobody who can say their lane is the One True Lane and they are Better Than Everyone Else because they were in The One True Lane first, then the queue narrative entirely falls apart and they have to default to, y'know, doing what they were supposed to.

You may want to re-read the vehicle and traffic law, or whatever it is called in whatever is your current state, regarding lane change, merge,  and right of way on roads with multiple lanes.

Nevada has traffic laws?

How would anyone be able to tell?

[SSOWorld]

The whole problem could be solved by just telling people that there's a merge ahead, but never telling them which lane will be dropped.

Or by having both lanes funnel into one that straddles the painted lane line, so that neither of them is the continuing lane.

The reason zipper merge doesn't work is because of drivers who see the road as a first-come-first-served queue, like at a grocery store. It isn't. If there is nobody who can say their lane is the One True Lane and they are Better Than Everyone Else because they were in The One True Lane first, then the queue narrative entirely falls apart and they have to default to, y'know, doing what they were supposed to.

You may want to re-read the vehicle and traffic law, or whatever it is called in whatever is your current state, regarding lane change, merge,  and right of way on roads with multiple lanes.

No one law says that vehicles can be armchair cops and block lanes.

[Scott5114]

We aren't going to go into a side tangent about what "ethical highway driving" is?  I was looking forward to some analysis of what "lawful evil" might look like.

Lawful evil would be following/exploiting the traffic laws for personal gain rather than the societal benefit of safe, efficient travel. I'm having a hard time coming up with a routine example of that, though I suppose one example would be a situation where forcing a collision where the law would say the other driver is at fault, in order to get their insurance to total out your car. Though that's insurance fraud, so I guess that's not lawful either. Hmm.

[ElishaGOtis]

The whole problem could be solved by just telling people that there's a merge ahead, but never telling them which lane will be dropped.

Or by having both lanes funnel into one that straddles the painted lane line, so that neither of them is the continuing lane.

The reason zipper merge doesn't work is because of drivers who see the road as a first-come-first-served queue, like at a grocery store. It isn't. If there is nobody who can say their lane is the One True Lane and they are Better Than Everyone Else because they were in The One True Lane first, then the queue narrative entirely falls apart and they have to default to, y'know, doing what they were supposed to.

Similarly, see the Maryland method. Even though one lane geometrically ends, it is treated as described above.

There is a new sign in the 11th edition MUTCD for just that, seemingly to encourage the merging configuration's use outside of just the Northeast and MD where they're common.

W4-8 Symbolic (required)


W9-4 Word Message (optional, and if used, it's supposed to be placed before W4-8)

[Max Rockatansky]

We aren't going to go into a side tangent about what "ethical highway driving" is?  I was looking forward to some analysis of what "lawful evil" might look like.

Lawful evil would be following/exploiting the traffic laws for personal gain rather than the societal benefit of safe, efficient travel. I'm having a hard time coming up with a routine example of that, though I suppose one example would be a situation where forcing a collision where the law would say the other driver is at fault, in order to get their insurance to total out your car. Though that's insurance fraud, so I guess that's not lawful either. Hmm.

In this context I think some of the early examples Kyle and I gave fit.  Neither of lines up early to get over during a zipper merge.  Normals would probably find that rude (evil) but it is fact still lawful.

All the same, I already admitted to jumping line queues when people make room and it can be anticipated.  In fact, I do it regularly on the transition from CA 180 westbound to CA 99 northbound.  Drivers crawl from stops and often leave a decent 75-100 feet wide open for someone to merge in before the ramp lane fully splits away (rather the solid white line starts).   The way I see it, they are causing a hazard by having traffic back further back onto the freeway more than necessary.

[Scott5114]

In this context I think some of the early examples Kyle and I gave fit.  Neither of lines up early to get over during a zipper merge.  Normals would probably find that rude (evil) but it is fact still lawful.

There's enough nuance I won't get into with this on the D&D side which would cause me to probably rule that neutral evil or true neutral. Other DMs might disagree. (Fortunately for me, alignment means approximately jack squat in 5e, which means I've never had to have one of those "So, about your alignment..." talks with a player.)

[Rothman]

In this context I think some of the early examples Kyle and I gave fit.  Neither of lines up early to get over during a zipper merge.  Normals would probably find that rude (evil) but it is fact still lawful.

There's enough nuance I won't get into with this on the D&D side which would cause me to probably rule that neutral evil or true neutral. Other DMs might disagree. (Fortunately for me, alignment means approximately jack squat in 5e, which means I've never had to have one of those "So, about your alignment..." talks with a player.)

Yep, for all the fun memes and talk about alignments, D&D moved gameplay away from them long ago.

[MikeTheActuary]

You know, it's not really that hard.

Zipper merging is great when it is accepted by local custom.

Attempting to queue-jump for normal exits, or using the shoulder to queue-jump is assholish behavior to be penalized karmicly.

"Straddling the line" in an effort to block queue-jumpers is arrogance unless you're a LEO.

As far as real zipper merging goes:

• If signs are posted or lanes are striped so as to encourage it, practicing zipper merging is always OK
• If local custom tolerates it, zipper merging is OK
• Not withstanding signage, striping, or local custom, escaping a queue to change into the still-moving lane to advance to the merge point is assholish behavior.
  
• If local custom doesn't practice it, and if there is no signing/striping to encourage it....being one of the few folks to practice zipper-merging is assholish behavior.

[Rothman]

You know, it's not really that hard.

Evidently, it is.

All merge striping encourages zipper merges...

[kphoger]

Is that ethical?

In my opinion, the ethical thing to do is whatever benefits the system overall.  Also in my opinion, the zipper merge (using both lanes and then taking turns at the constriction point) provides better overall benefit than everyone queuing up early.  Therefore, in my opinion, the ethical thing to do is to use both lanes rather than queueing up with everyone else.  Your opinion might differ from mine, but I don't see anything unethical about using an empty lane till it ends just because everyone else chose the less efficient course of queueing up early.

The whole problem could be solved by just telling people that there's a merge ahead, but never telling them which lane will be dropped.

Or by having both lanes funnel into one that straddles the painted lane line, so that neither of them is the continuing lane.

The reason zipper merge doesn't work is because of drivers who see the road as a first-come-first-served queue, like at a grocery store. It isn't. If there is nobody who can say their lane is the One True Lane and they are Better Than Everyone Else because they were in The One True Lane first, then the queue narrative entirely falls apart and they have to default to, y'know, doing what they were supposed to.

You may want to re-read the vehicle and traffic law, or whatever it is called in whatever is your current state, regarding lane change, merge,  and right of way on roads with multiple lanes.

Why?  At most, whatever laws you find would simply apply to all drivers instead of half of them.

Most state vehicle codes (VAT § 1128 in New York, for example) only say that you can't change lanes until you have "first ascertained that such movement can be made with safety".  That's it.  Nothing about "right of way" or whatever you thought was in there.  At least, not in most (and especially UVC-conforming) states.

All the same, I already admitted to jumping line queues when people make room and it can be anticipated.

I occasionally do too, even in cases where I actually think it might be unethical.  Sometimes I'm just selfish and don't want to wait.  The big one that jumps out in my mind was when we were driving from Wichita to Galveston for the 4th of July week-end.  We'd been driving all day, and we hit terrible traffic in Houston at rush hour.  Coming around the east side on the Sam Houston Tollway, the SB I-35 lane of the exit ramp was backed up all the way to the mainline, while the NB I-35 lane was clear.  I drove in that clear lane and then barged my way in.  Ethical? probably not.  But whatever.

"Straddling the line" in an effort to block queue-jumpers is arrogance unless you're a LEO.

Straddling the line in an effort to block drivers in an open lane with no imminent hazard is bad even if you are a LEO.

[kalvado]

You know, it's not really that hard.

Evidently, it is.

All merge striping encourages zipper merges...

any example in NYS?