"asdf" wrote in message
...
On 1 Nov 2006 07:07:37 -0800, wrote:

The only National Rail tickets valid for entry/exit at Farringdon are
those marked London Zone 1 or named as Farringdon.

...or "London Thameslink"

I have bought return tickets from Gatwick Airport to Kings Cross
Thameslink. Can I use them to and from Farringdon instead?

Yes, the National Rail Conditions of Carriage allow you to do this
(unless the conditions of the ticket say you can't, but this doesn't
apply to any of the Gatwick to KXTL fares). I assume the (LU) staff at
Farringdon are sufficiently well versed in the NRCoC to not give you
any hassle.



Well at Farringdon, there is now a sign saying you need a ticket to
Farringdon and my specific ticket worked correctly.

Much obliged for the advice.

Heracles Pollux wrote:
"Paul Weaver" wrote in message
ups.com...
zin92 wrote:
Heracles Pollux wrote:

...and then some black man in a blue hat
wouldn't let me out the other end without an argument...

And the significance of a "black" man is...?

that the OP discrimnates on skin color like so many bigots.



Only in London would such a trivial attribute cause such an hysterical and
unfounded reaction.

What is discriminatory by saying "a black man in a blue hat"?

You're just picking on me because I'm white.

Are you assuming we might want to go back and find the guy?

wrote in message
ups.com...

Heracles Pollux wrote:
"Paul Weaver" wrote in message
ups.com...
zin92 wrote:
Heracles Pollux wrote:

...and then some black man in a blue hat
wouldn't let me out the other end without an argument...

And the significance of a "black" man is...?

that the OP discrimnates on skin color like so many bigots.



Only in London would such a trivial attribute cause such an hysterical
and
unfounded reaction.

What is discriminatory by saying "a black man in a blue hat"?

You're just picking on me because I'm white.

Are you assuming we might want to go back and find the guy?




If you don't want me to remember your appearance then don't engage me in
conflict.

On Fri, 3 Nov 2006 12:00:52 -0000, "Heracles Pollux"
wrote:


"zin92" wrote in message
roups.com...

Heracles Pollux wrote:

...and then some black man in a blue hat
wouldn't let me out the other end without an argument...

And the significance of a "black" man is...?



His distinguishing features we

1. He was black.
2. He had a blue hat.


This is a bit like saying, "I saw a red car drive past".

And in neither case need the adjective be used. That you use it, in
the case of the man in particular, says a lot about you.

Heracles Pollux wrote:
"zin92" wrote in message
oups.com...

Heracles Pollux wrote:

...and then some black man in a blue hat
wouldn't let me out the other end without an argument...

And the significance of a "black" man is...?



His distinguishing features we

1. He was black.
2. He had a blue hat.

So why didn't you mention
3. Height
4. Hair color/length
5. Shirt color

?

Heracles Pollux wrote:
"Paul Weaver" wrote in message
ups.com...
zin92 wrote:
Heracles Pollux wrote:

...and then some black man in a blue hat
wouldn't let me out the other end without an argument...

And the significance of a "black" man is...?

that the OP discrimnates on skin color like so many bigots.



Only in London would such a trivial attribute cause such an hysterical and
unfounded reaction.

What is discriminatory by saying "a black man in a blue hat"?

The fact you mentioned skin colour and not height or eye colour meant
you thought it was significant.

You're just picking on me because I'm white.

You're white? I missed that, where did you say that?

"Heracles Pollux" wrote:
...and then some black man in a blue hat
wouldn't let me out the other end without an argument...

And the significance of a "black" man is...?

that the OP discrimnates on skin color like so many bigots.

Only in London would such a trivial attribute cause such an hysterical and
unfounded reaction.

What is discriminatory by saying "a black man in a blue hat"?

You're just picking on me because I'm white.

Don't be so ****ing stupid. Had he been a white man would you have referred
to him as "a white man in a blue hat" ?

--
"For want of the price of tea and a slice, the old man died."

"Heracles Pollux" wrote:
...and then some black man in a blue hat
wouldn't let me out the other end without an argument...

And the significance of a "black" man is...?

His distinguishing features we

1. He was black.
2. He had a blue hat.

This is a bit like saying, "I saw a red car drive past". "He wore a white
shirt". "The leaves on the trees are golden".

Perhaps you would also like to infer that I have some prejudice (or
favourtism) towards red cars, since the colour of the car is an attribute
I and most people notice.

No, it simply appears that you're trying to [unsuccessfully] dig yourself
out of a hole you've stumbled across. If people specifically wanted to know
what the guy looked like, then his colour of skin, along with other
descriptors like his height/build, would be useful. But it was just
mentioned in passing, so why mention it? If he was a white man would you
have bothered to mention that he was white?

--
"For want of the price of tea and a slice, the old man died."

If people specifically wanted to
know what the guy looked like, then his colour of skin, along with other
descriptors like his height/build, would be useful.


Height: 6ft
Weight; 14 stone
Fitness: moderately over weight
Eye sight: poor, glasses
Hearing: poor
Language: working class poorly educated
Demeanour: confrontational, argumentative, unstable, unhelpful to the
travelling public, possbily racist against white people, possibly prejudiced
against suit wearing educated management grade travellers.
Smell: typically unsavoury of a privatised "public" sector worker.


Any other details you require?


I think "black man in blue hat" was actually quite generous.

"Left wing racist working class smelly ill-educated jobsworth" would be
equally accurate.

"Heracles Pollux" wrote:
If people specifically wanted to
know what the guy looked like, then his colour of skin, along with other
descriptors like his height/build, would be useful.

Height: 6ft
Weight; 14 stone
Fitness: moderately over weight
Eye sight: poor, glasses
Hearing: poor
Language: working class poorly educated
Demeanour: confrontational, argumentative, unstable, unhelpful to the
travelling public, possbily racist against white people, possibly
prejudiced against suit wearing educated management grade travellers.
Smell: typically unsavoury of a privatised "public" sector worker.

Any other details you require?

Relevant ones would be good. A description of his general attitude and
demeanour would have been relevant, whereas anything describing his
appearance, from his skin colour to clothing, was completely unneccessary.

I think "black man in blue hat" was actually quite generous.

"Left wing racist working class smelly ill-educated jobsworth" would be
equally accurate.

And at least some of it more relevant.

"I was told to go to Victoria, admitted on the underground, and then some
black man in a blue hat wouldn't let me out the other end without an
argument."

Racist is guesswork on your part, smelly is irrelevant, "possibly prejudiced
against suit wearing educated management grade travellers" is just a chip
you seem to have on your shoulder, etc etc.

"Confrontational", "argumentative", and "unhelpful to the
travelling public" would all have been relevant, as would have "member of
station staff manning the ticket barriers".

--
"For want of the price of tea and a slice, the old man died."