^ No problem, I do see your point.
But in terms of pure tactical application, how would you hope to defeat instant-on RADAR, non-marked (no visible strips in the roadway) VASCAR, and the like?
One of the cardinal rules of the game is to never speed alone - or if so, then to use an even more heightened set of response/tactical standards (i.e. routinely adjusting speed, as I've detailed prior, which is I assume what you mean, when you cited driver skill and knowledge) - and the use of a "rabbit/bird-dog" is accepted practice, and is not, in any way, a sign of cowardice, but rather is skilled anticipation of a tactical advantage that presents itself serendipitously.
My response to your "Rabbit" thread, which should time-stamp prior to my response to this thread, shows my own feelings about things like this - that we must ALL
be willing to trailblaze, to be the rabbit/bird-dog, at one point or another.
I do not view using a rabbit/bird-dog as putting a sacrificial lamb up for the roast.
I'm not marching an innocent to their proverbial death - rather, that it this practice, when undertaken in the real-world, specifically takes advantage of those who are, themselves, knowingly exceeding the boundaries of the law.
To me, that's the where I draw the moral/ethical line.
These rabbits/bird-dogs are themselves choosing to break the law.
I am not taking an innocent, and allowing them to bear what would not be a proper burden.
I once had, on my commute home (yes, I decided to speed, that day), a Z4 driver (with detector, but he must not have picked up the signal that I cued-in on, and yes, he also had a top-flight detector onboard), who used tremendous discretion in using me as a "rabbit." He stayed at a courteous and safe following distance, and furthermore, did not undertake any drastic/unsafe maneuvers in order to stay with me, his chosen rabbit.
My detector had burped a single chirp of Ka, and in knowing the layout of the land and the potential trap that laid just ahead, I slowed.
As I slowed, I saw him change lanes to pass me.
I immediately stuck my hand out the window, and signaled for him to slow as well.
To me, he was not a coward - he skillfully recognized me as a speeder whom he could use to extend the bounds of his tactical awareness.
Yes, he used me as a rabbit, but he did so in a way which was courteous enough that I did not feel put upon. I was breaking the law, I was culpable, and just because I knew the lay of the terrain and the threats, I wasn't about to sacrifice him for a laugh, when he'd done nothing wrong, by the common "rules of speeding."
At the next light, he thanked me for having saved him from the I/O trap which he did not know about, as he'd just moved into the area.
I think that there must be some moral compass used here, to judge what is innocent, and what is guilty behavior.
The battlefield analogy, in this case, I do not feel is appropriate, particularly in its application to "human shields." No non-combatant or prisoners-of-war should be utilized in such a manner, and at the same time, I do not view such "rabbit/bird-dog" drivers as "non-combatants," who are either without culpability or having been absolved of such.
If my enemy - a combatant the same as I - should make a tactically unsound move? should I have the courtesy to first inform him of his mistake, or should I take advantage of it? - in this respect, I've always been taught to not hesitate, but rather, offer a word of thanks to the powers that be, afterwards.
To me, "bird-dogs/rabbits" are not innocents.
This is how I see "rabbits/bird-dogs," and this is how I utilize them, when
I utilize them.
Perhaps you and I just see things differently, in this respect.
Overall, however, I honestly find it difficult to "keep" rabbits - they either end up going too fast for my comfort, or too slow for my needs. I usually just end up cruising where I'm comfortable, which, in and of itself, is usually in that gray-zone where most State Troopers will let one "pass," as long as one's driving steadily and courteously.
Of-course, that's with the exception of wolf-packs, which I delight in participating in, as you've read from the other thread.
[ Note, in re-reading my post above [response #3 of this thread], I think either I misrepresented my point, with the use of your "Rabbit" thread, or perhaps it can be read as such. What I meant to do in citing your post was to illustrate to agrey how *NOT* to utilize a rabbit/bird-dog, which is what I hope he would have gathered, after reading my reply to your OP, there.
Also, I am not sure exactly how this ties into any type of corporate/vested-interest "shilling" - which, yes, anyone who has been in this community for more than a year will, sadly, see....and which we both have a deep-set and common distaste for.
Yes, I can see where honor and integrity comes into play in both scenarios, but I do not see these shills as bird-dogs/rabbits. I think that the bird-dog/rabbit has a level of culpability that is much, much more morally and ethically benign than that of those individuals who either are such shills or who use such marketing ploys.
I think that as both of us have made abundantly clear in just about every community we participate in, we have little tolerance for those who lie or in any way misrepresent the truth - either by outright deception or even by simple, but knowing, omission.