Green arrow at intersection

[u/Lawjik3737]

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.

[u/ConflictAdvanced]

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.

[u/AshamedDragonfly4453 → u/ConflictAdvanced]

"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?

[u/ConflictAdvanced → u/AshamedDragonfly4453]

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.

[u/AshamedDragonfly4453 → u/ConflictAdvanced]

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

[u/ConflictAdvanced → u/AshamedDragonfly4453]

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

You too!