On 24/11/2012 15:34, Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 15:28:38 on Sat, 24
Nov 2012, Graeme Wall remarked:

This time it's your corner cases that I'm saying shouldn't be dictating
general policy.

Not my cases, you keep inventing unlikely and improbable scenarios and
then, apparently, claiming they are dictating general policy.

There was an objection to intermediate drop-off by bustitution vehicles
in that they are apparently uninsured if giving random non-train-users
local rides.

Well you've got that bit wrong.


My improbable and unlikely scenarios (glad you agree about that, by the
way) relate to the mechanism by which such random non-train-users might
ever find their way onto the buses in the first place.

Well you've got that bit wrong as well.


If it's unlikely and improbable that they find their way onto the buses,
then the intermediate drop-off policy should not be dictated by the
objective of preventing them using the bus.

And you've got that bit wrong as well.

Doing well so far.

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read, substitute trains for rail.
Railway Miscellany at http://www.greywall.demon.co.uk/rail