ELL poorly patronised now
 

On Mon, 23 Nov 2015 21:31:47 +0000
Mizter T wrote:
On 18/11/2015 09:36, d wrote:
I took the ELL from Highbury this morning for the first time in about 6
months.
Even after the obligatory 7 minute wait for the train to leave it was still
only a 3rd full in the middle of the morning rush hour. Compared to last time
I used it this is virtually empty. I can only assume the poor service
frequency and slow journey times (25 mins to do the 4 miles to canada water
this morning) have put people off as they did me. What a waste of an asset.


I use the ELL fairly regularly (peak and off-peak) and it's always well
patronised.

Beats me then. Perhaps I'll try it again at some point and see, but the
train I got on at around 8.30 had hardly anyone standing after waiting at
highbury for the usual time.

--
Spud

ELL poorly patronised now
 

ELL poorly patronised now
 

On Tue, 24 Nov 2015 22:31:16 -0000 (UTC)
"Peter Smyth" wrote:
wrote:

On Mon, 23 Nov 2015 21:31:47 +0000
Mizter T wrote:
On 18/11/2015 09:36, d wrote:
I took the ELL from Highbury this morning for the first time in
about 6
months.
Even after the obligatory 7 minute wait for the train to leave it
was still only a 3rd full in the middle of the morning rush hour.
Compared to last time I used it this is virtually empty. I can
only assume the poor service frequency and slow journey times (25
mins to do the 4 miles to canada water this morning) have put
people off as they did me. What a waste of an asset.


I use the ELL fairly regularly (peak and off-peak) and it's always
well patronised.

Beats me then. Perhaps I'll try it again at some point and see, but
the train I got on at around 8.30 had hardly anyone standing after
waiting at highbury for the usual time.

So there were some people standing? Before you were claiming it was
"virtually empty". You clearly have a different definition of empty to
everyone else.

Have you actually ever been on a 378? Its transverse seating the whole way
along. Even with all the seats taken its probably barely 25% of trains
capacity. Compared to the crush loading I experienced when I used to commute
on the line then yes, it was virtually empty.

--
Spud

ELL poorly patronised now
 

wrote:
On Tue, 24 Nov 2015 22:31:16 -0000 (UTC)
"Peter Smyth" wrote:
d wrote:

On Mon, 23 Nov 2015 21:31:47 +0000
Mizter T wrote:
On 18/11/2015 09:36, d wrote:
I took the ELL from Highbury this morning for the first time in
about 6
months.
Even after the obligatory 7 minute wait for the train to leave it
was still only a 3rd full in the middle of the morning rush hour.
Compared to last time I used it this is virtually empty. I can
only assume the poor service frequency and slow journey times (25
mins to do the 4 miles to canada water this morning) have put
people off as they did me. What a waste of an asset.


I use the ELL fairly regularly (peak and off-peak) and it's always
well patronised.

Beats me then. Perhaps I'll try it again at some point and see, but
the train I got on at around 8.30 had hardly anyone standing after
waiting at highbury for the usual time.

So there were some people standing? Before you were claiming it was
"virtually empty". You clearly have a different definition of empty to
everyone else.

Have you actually ever been on a 378? Its transverse seating the whole way
along. Even with all the seats taken its probably barely 25% of trains
capacity. Compared to the crush loading I experienced when I used to commute
on the line then yes, it was virtually empty.

It sounds like *you've* never been on a 378: they only have longitudinal
seats. There are no transverse seats.

ELL poorly patronised now
 

On Wed, 25 Nov 2015 09:53:16 -0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote:
wrote:
Have you actually ever been on a 378? Its transverse seating the whole way
along. Even with all the seats taken its probably barely 25% of trains
capacity. Compared to the crush loading I experienced when I used to commute
on the line then yes, it was virtually empty.

It sounds like *you've* never been on a 378: they only have longitudinal
seats. There are no transverse seats.

Typo, meant longitudinal. Point still stands. As for having never been on
one, I spent 6 months commuting on the things. I doubt you've even spent
6 seconds on one.

--
Spud

ELL poorly patronised now
 

wrote:
On Wed, 25 Nov 2015 09:53:16 -0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote:
wrote:
Have you actually ever been on a 378? Its transverse seating the whole way
along. Even with all the seats taken its probably barely 25% of trains
capacity. Compared to the crush loading I experienced when I used to commute
on the line then yes, it was virtually empty.

It sounds like *you've* never been on a 378: they only have longitudinal
seats. There are no transverse seats.

Typo, meant longitudinal. Point still stands. As for having never been on
one, I spent 6 months commuting on the things. I doubt you've even spent
6 seconds on one.

At least I know very well what kind of seats they have (and that they're
rock hard). So, given that you don't even know what kind of seats they
have, I really doubt you've ever set foot in one.

I'm also intrigued by your definition of 'typo'. Presumably every error you
make can be lightly dismissed as a typo?

ELL poorly patronised now
 

On 18/11/2015 09:36, d wrote:
I took the ELL from Highbury this morning for the first time in about 6 months.
Even after the obligatory 7 minute wait for the train to leave it was still
only a 3rd full in the middle of the morning rush hour. Compared to last time
I used it this is virtually empty. I can only assume the poor service
frequency and slow journey times (25 mins to do the 4 miles to canada water
this morning) have put people off as they did me. What a waste of an asset.

try getting on a northbound train at New Cross Gate between 8 and 930 am
any weekday,
very difficult, you may have to wait for several trains to pass before
you can get
a space.
Even in the middle of the day they are often packed....
--
Martin

replies to newsgroup only please.

ELL poorly patronised now
 

On Wed, 25 Nov 2015 10:25:26 -0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote:
wrote:
On Wed, 25 Nov 2015 09:53:16 -0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote:
wrote:
Have you actually ever been on a 378? Its transverse seating the whole way
along. Even with all the seats taken its probably barely 25% of trains
capacity. Compared to the crush loading I experienced when I used to
commute
on the line then yes, it was virtually empty.

It sounds like *you've* never been on a 378: they only have longitudinal
seats. There are no transverse seats.

Typo, meant longitudinal. Point still stands. As for having never been on
one, I spent 6 months commuting on the things. I doubt you've even spent
6 seconds on one.

At least I know very well what kind of seats they have (and that they're
rock hard). So, given that you don't even know what kind of seats they
have, I really doubt you've ever set foot in one.

Is this your weekly trolling day?

I'm also intrigued by your definition of 'typo'. Presumably every error you
make can be lightly dismissed as a typo?

Believe it or not, some of us work for a living so occasionally when typing
out something quickly in order to get on with some work I make a mistake.

--
Spud

ELL poorly patronised now
 

On Wed, 25 Nov 2015 10:40:32 +0000
Martin Smith wrote:
On 18/11/2015 09:36, d wrote:
I took the ELL from Highbury this morning for the first time in about 6
months.
Even after the obligatory 7 minute wait for the train to leave it was still
only a 3rd full in the middle of the morning rush hour. Compared to last time
I used it this is virtually empty. I can only assume the poor service
frequency and slow journey times (25 mins to do the 4 miles to canada water
this morning) have put people off as they did me. What a waste of an asset.

try getting on a northbound train at New Cross Gate between 8 and 930 am
any weekday,
very difficult, you may have to wait for several trains to pass before
you can get
a space.
Even in the middle of the day they are often packed....

Presumably they're all heading off to Canada Water to get to docklands whereas
in the past they'd have gone to London Bridge. Given some of the crowds I've
seen at Canada Water and how full jubilee line trains are, if it were me I'd
still go to london bridge.

--
Spud

ELL poorly patronised now
 

On Wed, 25 Nov 2015 11:21:24 +0000 (UTC), d wrote:

On Wed, 25 Nov 2015 10:25:26 -0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote:
wrote:
On Wed, 25 Nov 2015 09:53:16 -0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote:
wrote:
Have you actually ever been on a 378? Its transverse seating the whole way
along. Even with all the seats taken its probably barely 25% of trains
capacity. Compared to the crush loading I experienced when I used to
commute
on the line then yes, it was virtually empty.

It sounds like *you've* never been on a 378: they only have longitudinal
seats. There are no transverse seats.

Typo, meant longitudinal. Point still stands. As for having never been on
one, I spent 6 months commuting on the things. I doubt you've even spent
6 seconds on one.

At least I know very well what kind of seats they have (and that they're
rock hard). So, given that you don't even know what kind of seats they
have, I really doubt you've ever set foot in one.

Is this your weekly trolling day?

As opposed to your daily trolling?

I'm also intrigued by your definition of 'typo'. Presumably every error you
make can be lightly dismissed as a typo?

Believe it or not, some of us work for a living so occasionally when typing
out something quickly in order to get on with some work I make a mistake.

Is 'occasionally' a typo for 'invariably'?

ELL poorly patronised now
 

On Wed, 25 Nov 2015 13:10:42 +0000
Recliner wrote:
On Wed, 25 Nov 2015 11:21:24 +0000 (UTC), d wrote:
At least I know very well what kind of seats they have (and that they're
rock hard). So, given that you don't even know what kind of seats they
have, I really doubt you've ever set foot in one.

Is this your weekly trolling day?

As opposed to your daily trolling?

So you admit it then.

I'm also intrigued by your definition of 'typo'. Presumably every error you
make can be lightly dismissed as a typo?

Believe it or not, some of us work for a living so occasionally when typing
out something quickly in order to get on with some work I make a mistake.

Is 'occasionally' a typo for 'invariably'?

Is "Recliner" a euphamism for "idiot"?

--
Spud

ELL poorly patronised now
 

wrote:
On Wed, 25 Nov 2015 13:10:42 +0000
Recliner wrote:
On Wed, 25 Nov 2015 11:21:24 +0000 (UTC), d wrote:
At least I know very well what kind of seats they have (and that they're
rock hard). So, given that you don't even know what kind of seats they
have, I really doubt you've ever set foot in one.

Is this your weekly trolling day?

As opposed to your daily trolling?

So you admit it then.

I was simply trying to clarify your rant. I appreciate that English
probably isn't your first language, so we sometimes need help understanding
what it is you're trying to say. Based on where you appear to live, are
you perhaps a Turkish Cypriot?


I'm also intrigued by your definition of 'typo'. Presumably every error you
make can be lightly dismissed as a typo?

Believe it or not, some of us work for a living so occasionally when typing
out something quickly in order to get on with some work I make a mistake.

Is 'occasionally' a typo for 'invariably'?

Is "Recliner" a euphamism for "idiot"?

Please could you ask a native English speaker to translate "a euphamism"
into English?

ELL poorly patronised now
 

On Wed, 25 Nov 2015 15:46:26 -0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote:
wrote:
On Wed, 25 Nov 2015 13:10:42 +0000
Recliner wrote:
On Wed, 25 Nov 2015 11:21:24 +0000 (UTC), d wrote:
At least I know very well what kind of seats they have (and that they're
rock hard). So, given that you don't even know what kind of seats they
have, I really doubt you've ever set foot in one.

Is this your weekly trolling day?

As opposed to your daily trolling?

So you admit it then.

I was simply trying to clarify your rant. I appreciate that English

You generally fail to clarity anything.

probably isn't your first language, so we sometimes need help understanding
what it is you're trying to say. Based on where you appear to live, are
you perhaps a Turkish Cypriot?

You think I live somewhere near Green Lanes? Wrong. I do visit there quite
often though.

And no is the answer.

Is "Recliner" a euphamism for "idiot"?

Please could you ask a native English speaker to translate "a euphamism"
into English?

Oh bless, you've run it through your spellchecker and found another typo.
If you were in the cubs I'm sure Arkala would give you a little badge and
your mummy would be so proud.

--
Spud

ELL poorly patronised now
 

On 2015\11\25 17:03, d wrote:
On Wed, 25 Nov 2015 15:46:26 -0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote:
wrote:
On Wed, 25 Nov 2015 13:10:42 +0000
Recliner wrote:
On Wed, 25 Nov 2015 11:21:24 +0000 (UTC), d wrote:
At least I know very well what kind of seats they have (and that they're
rock hard). So, given that you don't even know what kind of seats they
have, I really doubt you've ever set foot in one.

Is this your weekly trolling day?

As opposed to your daily trolling?

So you admit it then.

I was simply trying to clarify your rant. I appreciate that English

You generally fail to clarity anything.

probably isn't your first language, so we sometimes need help understanding
what it is you're trying to say. Based on where you appear to live, are
you perhaps a Turkish Cypriot?

You think I live somewhere near Green Lanes? Wrong. I do visit there quite
often though.

And no is the answer.

Is "Recliner" a euphamism for "idiot"?

Please could you ask a native English speaker to translate "a euphamism"
into English?

Oh bless, you've run it through your spellchecker and found another typo.
If you were in the cubs I'm sure Arkala would give you a little badge and
your mummy would be so proud.

https://youtu.be/WmegERBKOUE?t=1m18s

ELL poorly patronised now
 

On Wed, 25 Nov 2015 17:33:42 +0000
Basil Jet wrote:
https://youtu.be/WmegERBKOUE?t=1m18s

Thats ironic coming from you.

--
Spud