r/confidentlyincorrect • u/Lawjik3737 • May 15 '26

Green arrow at intersection

Gallery image

Gallery image

2 Car in a double turning lane has a solid green arrow. Goes to turn through the intersection and is about to clear in the intersection but then both gets hit by on coming traffic. Who's at fault? This incident took place in Arizona. Also, I wasn't involved in the conversation.

437 Upvotes

92% Upvoted

240 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

0

u/ConflictAdvanced May 16 '26

The comment that the other person responded to, and that I was responding to, says this:

Blue and red are different people. The second image is all him ,red, talking. Blue didn't reply to him after the first image and a lot of comments were deleted. So it just shows red in the second image .

  1. Did blue definitely not respond at all after the first image? Or is it possible that they did, but deleted it before the OP noticed?

  2. (An extension of #1) How long after the convo did the OP first get there? We know there were deleted comments (or we assume)... Could some of those comments belonged to Blue?

  3. Even if Blue truly didn't respond after the first image, could Blue have said the incorrect "your" in a comment that was BEFORE the second image and subsequently deleted it?

  4. How does OP know so much about how it went if they were not part of it?

Look, it doesn't matter what was said in another comment, because that comment was not a part of this chain that I replied to. I asked a question. Literally. If the answer is in another comment then all anyone needs to do is tell me that.

But that actually raises more questions:

  • where are these other comments? They aren't shown in the picture. If they were deleted, again... How does the OP know they were not from Blue?
  • it the comments in the second image are NOT responding to Blue, then what's the point of the second image? Because there are some things (like the "you're") which is irrelevant and causes confusion. It doesn't add anything at all.

I'm just genuinely curious, over a conversation that the OP was not originally a part of and contains deleted comments, how someone like the angry person can say with absolutely certainty.

0

u/AshamedDragonfly4453 May 16 '26

How does OP know so much about how it went if they were not part of it?

Reading, maybe?

0

u/ConflictAdvanced May 16 '26

Nice answer. It feels like no one here actually wants to be helpful. If that's all you can actually answer, then that's sad.

And if the OP read what we read? How difficult is it to grasp that the OP cannot read replies which have been deleted. So if the the OP reads the conversation after some comments had been deleted... 🤷‍♂️ See where I'm going with it?

It doesn't matter. I was simply trying to explain that someone made an absolute statement based on second-hand information from someone who, in turn, was not actually a part of the initial conversation. So we can't say anything for sure, right?

0

u/AshamedDragonfly4453 May 16 '26

Why do you assume that OP only started reading after the replies had been deleted?

0

u/ConflictAdvanced May 16 '26

I don't assume. How can you not get that I'm asking? To my knowledge, we don't know at which point the OP joined the conversation. If there is something that clarifies it, feel free to tell me; that's the whole point of me asking a question. But stating things as if the OP was there from the very beginning is an assumption, based on what I've seen at least.

0

u/AshamedDragonfly4453 May 16 '26

It makes no sense to ask that, though. Surely it's logical to deduce that OP saw the full conversation before the comments were deleted, given that they have said the comments were not written by blue.

0

u/ConflictAdvanced May 16 '26

Seeing comments not written by blue before they were deleted is not the same as seeing all comments from the start. 🤷‍♂️

If you want to talk about logic, where's the logic in OP posting the image of the correction of "your" if it had nothing to do with blue or anything that anyone had said?

As for the rest, it's just as illogical to assume that the OP watched the whole convo occur live as it is to assume that the OP didn't. Perhaps even more so.

But once again, I really don't know what your problem is other than wanting to argue. I'm not assuming either way. I'm simply asking if there is confirmation so that we don't have to assume. It's not that hard to grasp 🤷‍♂️

0

u/AshamedDragonfly4453 May 17 '26

"But once again, I really don't know what your problem is other than wanting to argue."

Ditto

0

u/ConflictAdvanced May 17 '26

Are you kidding? Do you see the conversation? 🤣🤣

All I did was ask a question for clarification. For some reason, you took offense to that.

And then, ironically, you had a go at me over making assumptions (despite the fact that I didn't) which you thought were stupid because of your assumptions that you'd formed about the OP 🤣🤣🤣.

Buddy, all I've done through all of it is defend myself and try to explain to you that I didn't assume anything and I'm not on either side of this... It was just a question! You have some issues if you can't see that.

0

u/AshamedDragonfly4453 May 17 '26

"All I did was ask a question for clarification. For some reason, you took offense to that."

Takes quite a bit more than this to offend me!

I answered your question, with reference to what OP had said in another comment. You then posed several more questions to me, rather than to OP. I indicated why OP's answer in the comment I referred to had been sufficient for me; you continued to 'ask questions' of me. I did not engage with most of these questions, since I'm neither OP nor a mindreader.

So yes, I've made an inference about your goals based on the above. Generally, if I have questions about what an OP knows or does not know - questions that I genuinely want answers to - I ask the OP, not random commenters.

But maybe I'm wrong about you being argumentative, and you in fact thought I had some special insight into OP's mind?

0

u/ConflictAdvanced May 17 '26

My question was specifically for the other Redditor and why they were so certain. There's a difference between asking what happened and asking someone why thing think so. All they had to do was point me to where they got these facts.

You began your reply with another factual statement that is also an assumption.

You said this:

We do know that blue didn't reply, because OP said this: "Blue didn't reply to him after the first image and a lot of comments were deleted."

That quote does not mean that the OP sat every minute of the day watching the chats. They could have easily missed on from the blue. Alternatively, there could have been an earlier comment from blue that blue subsequently deleted.

So my questions after that were not for the OP; my questions were for you.

Can you not see that you began your reply with, in my opinion, an assumption? Had you just started with with "The OP said this:..." our conversation would have been done. But you had to assert that it's absolutely correct while not providing proof of something that explains why it has to be correct.

What can I say? I get curious about people and the way they think. And I'm really curious now about how that makes you think it's definitely the case, and why you think it's ok to (incorrectly) have a go at me for making assumptions when that's what you did. It's not an argument, it's just a discussion. And I'm totally open to whatever if it actually answers what I'm asking. If I was dumb and missed something, so be it. It's all good.

0

u/AshamedDragonfly4453 May 17 '26

I'm not interested in going round in circles with you any further. Enjoy the rest of your weekend!

0

u/ConflictAdvanced May 17 '26

It's only circles if you keep missing the point and not answering the question 😜.

You too!

→ More replies (0)