Oldjohnw wrote:I have the good fortune of not commuting and not living within 60 miles of any city or even really large town.
I have to say you've led a sheltered life. While not a daily occurrence I experience abuse enough times not to be surprised if it happens. As long as there is no physical abuse I just ignore it.
So today, on a single track road with a 'bin' lorry coming towards me, but stopped to empty bins, the impatient driver behind forces an overtake with about 50 yards to the truck, and then abruptly stops (with nowhere to go). As I cycle past I complement him on his driving and observational abilities and when he eventually catches up with me he starts yelling abuse not to be repeated here. Why do some drivers just have to be in front, even if it's obvious it will only be for (at most) 5 seconds???
Narrow-ish road, parked car on my side and oncoming traffic. I indicate and move out to overtake the parked car (since I can get past and stay on my own side) and the guy behind guns it and pulls in front of me braking sharply because there's nowhere for him to go!
So a quick swerve left, undertake and then back in front and past the parked car.
Half a mile later he caught up and started shouting abuse through the passenger window.
mikeymo wrote: Just because you feel insulted, doesn't mean you were.
To be honest, I too was struggling to understand you.
These forums frequently feature a demand to "go look at the data", which is really nothing more than a posh version of "just google it!!". I know it must be tiresome having to repeat the same things over and over again, but that's just part of trying to change things. So if you have "data", present them. Numbers, or it didn't happen.
The only "exposure value" I know about is this, which probably isn't what you mean:
A concept that everyone on the internet needs to learn is burden of proof. If you make a claim then it us up to you to provide data to back it up. It is not up to others to go and look at the data.
Not saying it is happening here, but I have experienced people using language that sounds superficially scientific but is either out of context or meaningless. I think the aim is to make the user sound like they have more knowledgeable than they are.
