Do I really have to stand to the right on an escalator? I think the nearest one is a mile away, that seems really inconvenient and unnecessary, and it's going to be hard to get my work done.
I'm surprised to find this sentiment on a site filled with computer programmers. The most important and difficult lesson of computer programming is that simple-sounding rules have a lot of details that we take for granted.
> I think the nearest one is a mile away, that seems really inconvenient and unnecessary
I think this way of thinking, being obtuse on purpose to try to win an internet argument (without a prize, no less), is the more unnecessary thing. What point does that argumentation try to prove other than that a hypothetical version of you, as opposed to most humans who live in large cities, are an inflexible idiot?
Most people are not 100% unaware of the context in which they are engaging. We know to apply escalator rules when we're at an escalator. We know to put things in bins when we have things to put in bins. What we don't know, we can learn through observation, reading the atmosphere, and making at least a minimal effort not to showboat our individualism and, apparently, any obtuse refusal to engage with our context.
(By the way, I don't actually think you are an inflexible idiot.)
That's my point. It's a lot more complicated than "stand to the right on an escalator." You have to learn through observation, read the atmosphere, and engage with context.
There are some less obtuse issues with your universal pronouncement. There are escalators where it's too narrow to pass. There's no need nor expectation to stand to one side on these. The same goes for escalators that are so long that nobody's walking up them to accelerate their progress, or when nobody is around, or when it's so crowded nobody's able to pass anyway. And, at least in the places I'm familiar with, it doesn't apply in places where people aren't going to be in a big hurry. Stand right, pass left applies to subway stations but not malls.
Maybe this all seems obvious. Well, go to a tourist-heavy place with escalators and observe how much of this is learned behavior that takes repeated long-term exposure to understand.
Manners are really complicated. The escalator thing is a relatively simple example compared to something like, say, paying for a meal in a restaurant with a group, and it's already pretty deep when you dig into it.
It's not so complicated that you assume you need to run out at this very moment to find the nearest elevator just to prove a point. That's moronic.
> There are escalators where it's too narrow to pass
So you see what everybody else is doing and do that. Presumably, if it's that narrow, everybody's just standing in the centre.
> The same goes for escalators that are so long that nobody's walking up them to accelerate their progress
The fact the staircase is so long is exactly why people would be walking up an escalator, to save the most time.
> or when nobody is around
Then it clearly doesn't matter.
> or when it's so crowded nobody's able to pass anyway
If everybody's on one side, it's not too crowded.
> it doesn't apply in places where people aren't going to be in a big hurry
Alright, that's fine for where you are familiar. It won't take long at all to notice that's not the case in Japan, there are enough elevators all around the place.
> Manners are really complicated
If you're completely unobservant yet somehow think you need to be on edge at all times, which seems contradictory, I'm sure it is.
Or if you think that they're inflexible edicts without nuance. They're manners, not morals.
I'm surprised to find this sentiment on a site filled with computer programmers. The most important and difficult lesson of computer programming is that simple-sounding rules have a lot of details that we take for granted.