Like I said, the systems are there for everyone. If signs are made
clearer for someone who is visually impaired to read, then *I* gain
too.

Why? Unless you're have bad eye sight too.

If PA systems are good enough for someone with a hearing defect to
understand, then *I* understand what is said too. If there is enough
circulation space inside trains for wheelchairs, then *I* don't have
to

And where do you think this space comes from? You think trains are
like the Tardis? More space = less or something else. Usually seats.
Not much fun if you some poor sod who has to stand in a crowded
train.

climb all over someone to pass them, nor they me. And so on. You've
proved you can moan. Maybe in future you could prove you can think.

Had to be there, the standard issue lefty response to anyone daring to
challenge some aspect of political correctness. Go listen to some whale
song and knit yourself a yoghurt you sap.

B2003

On 22 Apr 2005 06:06:57 -0700, Boltar wrote:
If signs are made clearer, then *I* gain too.
Why? Unless you're have bad eye sight too.
Well, for a start, if the print is bigger, I don't need to be as close
to it to read it, and I am less likely to misread it (which is a
possibility for someone even with perfect eyesight).

You think trains are like the Tardis?
No. I recommend you reach judgments based on comparison with reality.

Had to be there, the standard issue lefty response to anyone daring to
challenge some aspect of political correctness.
You aren't challenging political correctness. *That* might be worthy.
You are complaining about design choices and displaying a lack of logic.

--
http://gallery120232.fotopic.net/p12028680.html
(Bubble car 960 021 in Railtrack livery (mostly!) at Aylesbury in 2004)

No. I recommend you reach judgments based on comparison with reality.

The reality being something other than the trains I travel on everyday
perhaps?
Which reality are we talking about here? The reality where wheelchairs
space
can be squeezed into a train and it not effecting anything else?
Because as far
as I can see having a wheelchair spot means some seats go missing.
Unless
in the world you exist in this doesn't happen.

You aren't challenging political correctness. *That* might be worthy.
You are complaining about design choices and displaying a lack of
logic.

I'm saying that accomodating every single minority group on public
transport
isn't practical or feasible or a good way to spend money. Presumably
you
think it makes perfect sense to do so no matter what the cost or
inconvenience
to the majority.

B2003

Boltar wrote:
Because as far
as I can see having a wheelchair spot means some seats go missing.
Unless
in the world you exist in this doesn't happen.


Having a wheelchair spot means there are less seats and a large gap.
During the peak time it is better to have fewer seats because more
standing passengers can crush into the new open space and wheelchair
users (just like people with big shopping bags) are likely to avoid
travelling at rush hour.

On 22 Apr 2005 08:36:08 -0700, Boltar wrote:
having a wheelchair spot means some seats go missing.
Let's see. On a Mark 3 coach, the wheelchair spot means two seats are
taken out, the table size is reduced, and one of the seats is replaced
by a tip-up. Net loss *one* seat (out of 76). Gain - extra space for
wheelchair or pushchair or luggage or several standing people.

I'm saying that accomodating every single minority group on public
transport isn't practical or feasible or a good way to spend money.
Presumably you think it makes perfect sense to do so no matter what
the cost or inconvenience to the majority.
I'm not making any argument on behalf of minorities. As I have already
said, the things you find so distasteful, I find to be a benefit to me.
This is what I mean about you not thinking. Your prejudice blinds you
not only to the possibilities, but also as shown above to the realities.
--
http://gallery120232.fotopic.net/p9683900.html (Class 206 Tadpole unit)