"Robin" wrote in message
...
I'm not entirely convinced that you have to "be seen to be doing
something" with a barriered system that requires fare evaders to be
really antisocial to avoid paying


In addition to other comments I'll add that you need to explain then why
there are so many people milling around, most looking exceedingly unhappy,
outside my local Overground station whenever there are inspectors
(invariabl;y accompanied by police) checking entry and exit at the
barriers.

I'm not saying that they shouldn't have manual revenue protection

I'm just saying that "being seen to have it" isn't a reason for having it.

The people who cheat know that they are cheating - they don't need the
presence of inspectors to remind them

tim

I'm not saying that they shouldn't have manual revenue protection

I'm just saying that "being seen to have it" isn't a reason for
having it.
The people who cheat know that they are cheating - they don't need the
presence of inspectors to remind them


I am not sure your argument takes account of the behavioural effects of
things like visible revenue protection officers on normative behaviour.
I don't know of detailed research on the effects on travel but there is
quite a long history of research on the effect on taxpayers (and
non-payers) which suggests levels of vountary compliance increase with
an increased perception that non-compliance is low or that there
non-compliance carries significant risks of penalties/conviction. In
other words, the target population is not just those who are cheating,
it's also those who might be tempted to cheat.
--
Robin
reply to address is (meant to be) valid