Modern Life Is Rubbish

[Annie Bynnol]

12 hours ago, Chekhov said:

OK, so, if I have this right, you are saying that views from the Highland line are better from modern stock, it's to be hoped they don't put these units on then :

 

 

 

 

   Get it right! It is called the West Highland Line.         

   Get it right! They are already running.

   Get it right! Bikes do not get a view.

 

 

   People do:

     

     

    These are Highland Explorer carriages already added to the West Highland Line trains. Seating for 24 people and  space for 20 cycles, skis and other large items of sporting equipment. Even the daftest will spot the Highland Explorer carriage because it has a eye-catching livery, depicting iconic views from the West Highland Line.

     As for the view you can decide for yourself.

 

 And finally 

[Chekhov]

15 hours ago, Annie Bynnol said:

   These units have already been on the West Highland Line.

    The logo on the single carriage might give you a clue as to the main function of this vehicle. 
    Try again.

I am simply making the point that they plaster ruddy great vinyls all over the windows of trains, even trains used on lines many tourists travel on for their scenic value.

Thus proving the managers do not know what the effin' hell they're doing.

 

PS

Your avatar has writing so small I cannot read it, so :

1 - What does it say ?

and

2 - What is the point of it ?

 

13 hours ago, echo beach said:

No Chekhov I’m old enough to know the difference.

I was referring to the fact you mentioned that you had to be careful when leaning out of a steam train window not to get Cinders in your eyes!

I’ve been to too many pantomimes recently.

 

echo.

Oh sorry, I didn't get that one !

 

9 hours ago, Annie Bynnol said:

And finally 

Now that's more like it, but how is she able to do that with all the stewards and busy body fellow passengers on there ?

 

9 hours ago, Annie Bynnol said:

 As for the view you can decide for yourself.

Why have they put those boards there ? Was it for Covid or something ? And if so why have they not took them down again ?

Edited January 9 by Chekhov

[Chekhov]

9 hours ago, Annie Bynnol said:

Get it right! It is called the West Highland Line.         

   Get it right! They are already running.

   Get it right! Bikes do not get a view.

 

These are Highland Explorer carriages already added to the West Highland Line trains. Seating for 24 people and  space for 20 cycles, skis and other large items of sporting equipment.

Well we'll assume nobody ever has to stand in that section, but in any case I am making a wider point about vinyls on windows. I hate them. I cannot imagine why any bus or train company would plater them all over the windows, and that includes Supertram.

[echo beach]

I’ve travelled in Northern Italy on local trains where you literally can’t see out of the windows and it’s dark inside in daylight, due to the sprayed graffiti on the windows!

 

echo.

[Chekhov]

Here one so ridiculous and disproportionate I suspect even the usual suspects ( @Prettytom, @ECCOnoob, @altus  etc) will not argue in favour of it.

Then again.....

The eve lane swim session at Thorncliffe on a monday night is only 30 minutes long, in fact, since it never starts on time and sometimes finishes a bit early it's more like 25 minutes.

The reason is the pool is being used for swimming lessons before hand, no problem with that, but, and here's the thing, there are usually only 3 or 4 swimmers in the whole pool, i.e. all 6 lanes.,

So, we have 20 people or more all waiting to get in for their 25-30 minutes whilst the pool has only 3 or 4 people in it !

I asked why they could not lane off a lane or two for those being taught and use the other 4 or 5 lanes for lane swimming.

"On no we can't do that, because 'regulations' mean we cannot have the public in whilst kids are having swimming lessons".

WHAT !

Who came up with that one ?

And, I wonder if the parents of those few kids in the pool would be in favour of that if they were told the cost of their lessons would be going up by 3 or 4X to cover the cost of them having the whole pool.

I would bet good money none of them would want that, they'd be happy to split the pool.... 

[ECCOnoob]

34 minutes ago, Chekhov said:

Here one so ridiculous and disproportionate I suspect even the usual suspects ( @Prettytom, @ECCOnoob, @altus  etc) will not argue in favour of it.

Then again.....

The eve lane swim session at Thorncliffe on a monday night is only 30 minutes long, in fact, since it never starts on time and sometimes finishes a bit early it's more like 25 minutes.

The reason is the pool is being used for swimming lessons before hand, no problem with that, but, and here's the thing, there are usually only 3 or 4 swimmers in the whole pool, i.e. all 6 lanes.,

So, we have 20 people or more all waiting to get in for their 25-30 minutes whilst the pool has only 3 or 4 people in it !

I asked why they could not lane off a lane or two for those being taught and use the other 4 or 5 lanes for lane swimming.

"On no we can't do that, because 'regulations' mean we cannot have the public in whilst kids are having swimming lessons".

WHAT !

Who came up with that one ?

And, I wonder if the parents of those few kids in the pool would be in favour of that if they were told the cost of their lessons would be going up by 3 or 4X to cover the cost of them having the whole pool.

I would bet good money none of them would want that, they'd be happy to split the pool.... 

Safeguarding rules. We've been through all this before.  

 

Safety rules to ensure the staff are focused on the kids that THEY are responsible for and have liability for during that lesson thus not having to worry about other users of the pool at the same time nor have the risks of a load of random adults getting access to unaccompanied minors.  

 

How many more times is it going to take for it to get into your head. It is their venue. They have the responsibilities and liabilities. It's their rules which you are obliged to follow the moment you walk through the door.  I really don't know why you keep going since you object to it all so much.

 

You must be some sadist who gets off on getting all het up and angry because you keep attending even though you know it's going to happen. 

 

If you want to be free to swim when you want without any of all this bother, go arrange a private session or get your own pool. Problem solved.  

[ECCOnoob]

20 minutes ago, Chekhov said:

 

Questions :

1 - What exactly do you think could happen in the above scenario ? ?

2 - I assume you think it reasonable that the parents of the 3 or 4 kids using a whole pool for a few of them should be charged the extra it costs ? If not them then who should pay ?

Quite a lot could happen.

 

Example, one of those adults could inappropriately approach the children. One of those adults could inappropriately touch the children. One of those adults could accidently or deliberately injure one of those children. It's the venue who has responsibility to those children during the time that the venue is running their swimming lesson. How is this difficult to comprehend. The venue chooses to operate a specific time to run children only swimming lessons which those parents will pay for. It is the venue who owns and operates the pool so they can do what they like with it.

 

24 minutes ago, Chekhov said:

 

 

This is cobblers, their swimming teacher is there. But, as it happens, your implication is deeply offensive, and you must be paranoid.

BTW

 

I could not give a toss if you find it deeply offensive. It's reality.   There are lots of things that you in your mind you dismiss as  "cobblers" however, the rest of the world accepts and gets on with it.

 

The venue has to consider risk. They seemingly choose not to put extra pressure on their staff who are busy supervising a lesson to inexperienced kids by having other people in the pool at the same time just because some impatient entitled adults can't wait their turn.

 

26 minutes ago, Chekhov said:

 

This has got to be just about the most ludicrous thing you have ever said, and that's saying something

So I, and the 20 odd other swimmers, who are just as frustrated as I am at the absurd situation, am a "sadist" because I cannot see the point of us all waiting about for our 25 minutes in the water whilst the pool has about 3 people in it.

Yes you are quite right. Actually that is the wrong word I used. In fact you're a masochist. You are the one choosing to continue to go to this venue and put yourself through all this frustration and anger that you create despite the fact you'll know full well what the rules are and what 'inconvenience' you are going to suffer.

 

What would you call someone who chooses to continue to punish themselves.  You must be getting something out of it.

27 minutes ago, Chekhov said:

 

Is there no length to which you think it is not worth going for some nebulous concept of "Safeguarding", even when the risk is so minute it is not even statistically quantifiable ?

 

I think you know what my opinion is.

 

It's pretty well known that I'm a lawyer by trade and one who spent the last two decades dealing with commercial liabilities and fallout when things actually go wrong.

 

There is always those types like you, always bangs on about 'health and safety gone mad' and 'silly overbearing rules' and 'what's wrong with common sense' but coincidentally it's those very same types who are generally first in the queue to be screaming the house down, demanding heads to roll and costly public enquiries whenever it hits the fan.

 

Prevention is better than the cure.  

[Chekhov]

37 minutes ago, ECCOnoob said:

>> Chekhov said:

Questions :

1 - What exactly do you think could happen in the above scenario (lane swimming next to swimming lessons) ? ?<<

 

Quite a lot could happen.

Example, one of those adults could inappropriately approach the children. One of those adults could inappropriately touch the children. One of those adults could accidently or deliberately injure one of those children. 

How could, or would, anyone  do that with a load of swimming teachers and a life guard about ? 

I really believe you are a tinsy winsy bit paranoid.

Sadly the world is going in the direction you, and the many other paranoid virtue signalling authoritarians want, but fortuately I'll be dead before my signature comes true. As it will inevitably do.

 

[Chekhov]

One thing we know for sure, you are not one of the many lane swimmers who are inconvenienced by this ludicrous paranoid rule, or you would not come out with the guff you do.

[Chekhov]

45 minutes ago, ECCOnoob said:

I could not give a toss if you find it deeply offensive. .

You said it.