Tom Anderson:
So when are we going to see this new sig then,
John? I for one am getting quite excited.

John Rowland:
I wouldn't get too excited, it will be a toning down.

You mean you're going back to the Kia Pride version?

This won't do. But I can see that John's existing man-sized
signature must have unusually high maintenance costs. Maybe we
could guarantee the investment needed to cover them by setting up
a, oh I don't know, let's call it a "public-private partnership"?
--
Mark Brader, Toronto, C unions never strike!

"Mark Brader" wrote in message
...
John Rowland:
Tom Anderson:

So when are we going to see this new sig then,
John? I for one am getting quite excited.

I wouldn't get too excited, it will be a toning down.

You mean you're going back to the Kia Pride version?

This won't do. But I can see that John's existing
man-sized signature must have unusually high
maintenance costs. Maybe we could guarantee
the investment needed to cover them by setting up
a, oh I don't know, let's call it a "public-private
partnership"?

Hmmm, you're really determined to lose the tag of "most esteemed
contributor".

--
John Rowland - Spamtrapped
Transport Plans for the London Area, updated 2001
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Acro...69/tpftla.html
A man's vehicle is a symbol of his manhood.
That's why my vehicle's the Piccadilly Line -
It's the size of a county and it comes every two and a half minutes

On Sun, 12 Dec 2004 20:13:33 +0000, Dave Arquati
wrote:

Does anyone have any information or insight into when the mooted audio
"next stop" information might be introduced to buses? By this I mean
that the bus tracks its location using whatever system (GPS I'd guess)
and the name of the next stop is automatically announced (as well as
possibly being shown on the screens installed in some buses).

Probably when they make their minds up on their new radio system.....

N

On Wed, 22 Dec 2004, Mark Brader wrote:

Tom Anderson:

So when are we going to see this new sig then, John? I for one am
getting quite excited.

John Rowland:

I wouldn't get too excited, it will be a toning down.

You mean you're going back to the Kia Pride version?

This won't do. But I can see that John's existing man-sized signature
must have unusually high maintenance costs. Maybe we could guarantee
the investment needed to cover them by setting up a, oh I don't know,
let's call it a "public-private partnership"?

Good idea. You can be the Strategic Signature Agency, responsible for
defining the overall direction of the signature, and i'll be OFSIG,
ensuring fair operation of the signature provision market. We'll also need
a Signature Inspectorate, to make sure it meets netiquette standards, and
a body, which i suggest be called Sigdash or Usenet Signature, to handle
the attatchment of the signature to each message. We'll also need a
parliamentary subcommittee to keep everyone on the straight and narrow.

Oh, and does anyone actually want to write the signature? Perhaps the best
thing would be if a few people wrote possible signatures, then licensed
them to people who would actually bid for the signature franchise. That
way, we can have two layers of competition, which should really make
things efficient!

Signatures on John's email, as opposed to his news posts, would of course
be handled by a separate set of bodies, although i suggest they are still
subject to OFSIG and SI regulation.

tom

--
All bloggers must die.

Mark Brader:
This won't do. But I can see that John's existing man-sized signature
must have unusually high maintenance costs. Maybe we could guarantee
the investment needed to cover them by setting up a, oh I don't know,
let's call it a "public-private partnership"?

Tom Anderson:
Good idea. You can be the Strategic Signature Agency, responsible for
defining the overall direction of the signature, and i'll be OFSIG,
ensuring fair operation of the signature provision market. We'll also need
a Signature Inspectorate, to make sure it meets netiquette standards, and
a body, which i suggest be called Sigdash or Usenet Signature, to handle
the attatchment of the signature to each message. We'll also need a
parliamentary subcommittee to keep everyone on the straight and narrow.

And two or three safety authorities competing to make the most stringent
regulations to make sure that it couldn't harm a fly (while ensuring that
no actual flies come to harm, of course).

Oh, and does anyone actually want to write the signature? Perhaps the best
thing would be if a few people wrote possible signatures,

No, no, they we need a few people to *hire* people to write possible
signatures. People on contract. In Bangladesh.

then licensed
them to people who would actually bid for the signature franchise. That
way, we can have two layers of competition, which should really make
things efficient!

Of course, the people considering the bids must decide on the basis
of how many translations into different EU languages will be provided
as part of the bid, and how elaborate a bureau will be set up to make
excuses for why the new signature must be delayed because they hadn't
had 10 years' warning that an Estonian version would be needed. Not to
mention braille, large-print, and audible versions, labour difficulties,
and leaves on the "-- " line.

Signatures on John's email, as opposed to his news posts, would of course
be handled by a separate set of bodies, although i suggest they are still
subject to OFSIG and SI regulation.

Clearly these bodies need to be nominated by local government, giving
rise to the long-term possibility of controll by a different political
party.
--
Mark Brader | "Oh, especially if it's accurate. There's nothing worse
Toronto | than *accurate*, ill-informed, irresponsible press
| speculation." -- Lynn & Jay: "Yes, Prime Minister"

My text in this article is in the public domain.

Chris wrote:
"Mrs Redboots" wrote...
John Rowland wrote to uk.transport.london on Mon, 13 Dec 2004:
"Dave Arquati" wrote...

Does anyone have any information or insight into when the mooted
audio "next stop" information might be introduced to buses?

Audio announcements are very annoying.

True, but I'd rather be told "Next Stop: Streatham Station" than "Bus
stopping at next bus-stop, please stand well clear of doors", which is
what one is told with monotonous regularity every 2 minutes or
thereabouts..... "Next stop: Lambeth Town Hall, please stand clear of
doors" would be less infuriating by a very long way!

Would be much better to not need to tell people to stand clear of the doors.
Do they listen take notice anyway?

True, but telling them is far better than the infernal BEEP BEEP BEEP
BEEP BEEP BEEP BEEP you currently get!

John Rowland wrote:
"Dave Arquati" wrotet...
Huge wrote:

Thanks and all, but your sig's still too long.

And crap.

Talk about looking a gift horse in the mouth. ****.

I quite like it.

I think it's attracting the wrong sort of women, so I'll be changing it at
the end of January. As it happens, my new sig will be shorter.

You're sig's attrating women???

Even if it's the wrong sort, that's quite an achievement!

"Aidan Stanger" wrote in message
...
Chris wrote:
"Mrs Redboots" wrote...
John Rowland wrote to uk.transport.london on Mon, 13 Dec 2004:
"Dave Arquati" wrote...

Does anyone have any information or insight into when the mooted
audio "next stop" information might be introduced to buses?

Audio announcements are very annoying.

True, but I'd rather be told "Next Stop: Streatham Station" than "Bus
stopping at next bus-stop, please stand well clear of doors", which is
what one is told with monotonous regularity every 2 minutes or
thereabouts.....

On some routes it is more like: "Bus stopping at next bus stop, please stand
wahl-cleah of closing doahs" (in a mildly Sloaney/Diana (God rest her)
voice).....bleep, bleep, bleep.

Aaarrrggghh!!!