Plan for dealing with obnoxious phone calls on trains?
 

In message , at
09:42:42 on Sat, 19 Nov 2005, Brimstone
remarked:
The direct answer to your question that as long as some people make
life unpleasant for others then I will tolerate nanny laws since I'm
not one of those who is being restricted.

...yet

Since none of my activities (nor those of milions of others) make life
unpleasant for others it's not going to happen.

....yet

I'd have problems if a new nanny law said I couldn't buy and drink a can
of beer on the train on the way home. I assume such a rule would be for
the prevention of unpleasantness, despite my belief that I can have
quiet drink without causing any unpleasantness.

The issue here isn't whether or not *you* cause any unpleasantness, in
your normal day to day life; but whether or not there's a risk that
*some* people might cause unpleasantness, resulting in a blanket ban
(which then causes you restriction).
--
Roland Perry

Plan for dealing with obnoxious phone calls on trains?
 

Cheeky wrote:
[...]
Alternatively just have a ride on one of Branson's trains. You'll
get the same without shelling out £200...

Unfortunately, selfish ******s seem to travel on Virgin trains as much
as any other operator. Worse, they seem to think that the Quiet Zone
is so that they have less background noise to interfere with their
loud mobile phone calls and hip hop at full blast on their iPod.

If you're having a poke at the Pendolino, I've not noticed any
meaningful attenuation of mobile signals on those trains. Where I find
no signal inside the train, it's in a place where the signal outside
the train is either too poor to use or nonexistent.

--
Her virtue was that she said what she thought, her vice that what she thought
didn't amount to much.
- Sir Peter Ustinov

Plan for dealing with obnoxious phone calls on trains?
 

Laurence Payne wrote:
On Sat, 19 Nov 2005 08:20:13 +0000 (UTC), "Brimstone"
wrote:

The direct answer to your question that as long as some people make
life unpleasant for others then I will tolerate nanny laws since I'm
not one of those who is being restricted.

Lucky you're perfect then :-)

Far from, I simply learnt the consequences of making life unpleasant for
others.

Plan for dealing with obnoxious phone calls on trains?
 

"Roland Perry" wrote in message
.uk

[snip]

I'd have problems if a new nanny law said I couldn't buy
and drink a can of beer on the train on the way home. I
assume such a rule would be for the prevention of
unpleasantness, despite my belief that I can have quiet
drink without causing any unpleasantness.

There are numerous signs up in many areas near where I live claiming that
the police have powers to restrict people from drinking alcohol in the
street. Now I'm one of those that prefers to do my drinking in a pub, but
that doesn't mean I believe that people shouldn't be able to drink in the
street if they want to. What I believe they should not be allowed to do is
behave in such a manner as to annoy or disturb others, but that isn't
necessarily related to drinking.

As to drinking on trains, or buses or any other form of public transport,
then that is up to the operators of said transport. If Virgin or whoever
don't want you to drink on their trains that's their business and if you
don't like it you don't have to travel with them. You may not like that, I
certainly don't, but it is still up to them.

The issue here isn't whether or not *you* cause any
unpleasantness, in your normal day to day life; but
whether or not there's a risk that *some* people might
cause unpleasantness, resulting in a blanket ban (which
then causes you restriction).

Precisely.

Ivor

Plan for dealing with obnoxious phone calls on trains?
 

In message , at 12:32:21 on Sat, 19 Nov
2005, Ivor Jones remarked:
There are numerous signs up in many areas near where I live claiming that
the police have powers to restrict people from drinking alcohol in the
street. Now I'm one of those that prefers to do my drinking in a pub, but
that doesn't mean I believe that people shouldn't be able to drink in the
street if they want to.

It's not just streets, such bans would extend to having a can of beer
with a picnic in the park.

As to drinking on trains, or buses or any other form of public transport,
then that is up to the operators of said transport. If Virgin or whoever
don't want you to drink on their trains that's their business and if you
don't like it you don't have to travel with them. You may not like that, I
certainly don't, but it is still up to them.

We are getting very much into the area of monopoly here. If I can't
travel by train because they have a ban on quiet enjoyment of a can of
beer, then there may not be an obvious alternative for me. What if
trains had a dress codes (like some shopping centres) would that be OK
too?

--
Roland Perry

Plan for dealing with obnoxious phone calls on trains?
 

On Sat, 19 Nov 2005 11:38:51 UTC, Roland Perry
wrote:

I'd have problems if a new nanny law said I couldn't buy and drink a can
of beer on the train on the way home. I assume such a rule would be for
the prevention of unpleasantness, despite my belief that I can have
quiet drink without causing any unpleasantness.

It is interesting, I think, that the most strident views expressed on
thise group about behaviour on trains are

a) that mobile phones should be banned from trains, because a few
people use them antisocially and

b) that alcohol should not be banned from trains, since it's only a
few people that use it antisocially

Even more interesting, there's a heavy overlap between these two
groups of shriekers (not you, Roland, just using your post as a
prompt).

Ian

Plan for dealing with obnoxious phone calls on trains?
 

On Sat, 19 Nov 2005 13:04:02 UTC, Roland Perry
wrote:

If I can't
travel by train because they have a ban on quiet enjoyment of a can of
beer

If you /can't/ travel on a train without having a can of beer, you
have much worse problems than finding alternative transport.

Ian

--

Plan for dealing with obnoxious phone calls on trains?
 

On Sat, 19 Nov 2005, Roland Perry wrote:

In message , at 23:17:51
on Fri, 18 Nov 2005, Tom Anderson remarked:

I don't care what people do on trains/busses/in public as long as it
doesn't affect other people. As soon as that happens, the perpetrator
has over-stepped the mark, and should stop.

So if someone insists on silence, and that affects someone who has an
important phone call to make...

Get up, walk to the vestibule, and make your call from there. This is not
rocket science.

We then have the situation that what one person does (insist on quiet)
affects other people (who have to move to the vestibule).

I'm intrigued that you choose to say 'one person' for the party wanting
quiet, and 'people' for the party wanting to make calls. In my experience,
it's the number of people making phone calls is ususally much smaller than
the number of people forced to listen to them.

But yes, you're right, that is essentially exactly what's happening. I
would have phrased it in terms of rights, myself - one person's right to
make a phone call against everyone else's right not to be disturbed - but
it comes out the same way, which is that the needs of the many outweigh
the needs of the few - or the one.

It's a poor choice in something like an HST because the vestibules are
very noisy,

That is true, i have to admit.

and impossible in most modern EMU/DMU because they don't have vestibules
in the sense you probably mean.

There's always, i think, some area by the doors which, even though it's
not completely separated from the seating, is somewhat acoustically
separated, by distance and usually by perspex screens.

And there are issues related to leaving ones seat (with or without
possessions left behind) and if the train is full and standing, moving
around it may not be an option.

In these situations, out of simple common courtesy to your fellow
passengers, you should refrain from making phone calls. If you absolutely
must make phone calls, don't take a train.

tom

--
I do not think we will have to wait for very long.

Plan for dealing with obnoxious phone calls on trains?
 

Tom Anderson wrote in
:

and impossible in most modern EMU/DMU because they don't have
vestibules in the sense you probably mean.

There's always, i think, some area by the doors which, even though
it's not completely separated from the seating, is somewhat
acoustically separated, by distance and usually by perspex screens.

And there are issues related to leaving ones seat (with or without
possessions left behind) and if the train is full and standing,
moving around it may not be an option.

In these situations, out of simple common courtesy to your fellow
passengers, you should refrain from making phone calls. If you
absolutely must make phone calls, don't take a train.

I think it's possible to use a mobile phone on a train without annoying
other people. The rules are as follows:

- set your phone to vibrate so incoming calls don't disturb other people

- talk in a normal voice: don't shout

- try to shield yourself from the rest of the carriage as much as possible,
for instance by turning towards the side of the train beside the window

- limit the use of your mobile phone to essential details like "the train's
been delayed - I'll see you at this time at this place instead of what we
agreed before".

People who use mobile phones for prolonged business calls, as if the train
is an extension of their office, speaking in a loud voice and talking about
sensitive confidential matters, are worthy of contempt; people who try to be
discreet are not.

Plan for dealing with obnoxious phone calls on trains?
 

In message dzZo7CxomoOm-pn2-gf7OyjtMdIJK@localhost, at 13:21:49 on
Sat, 19 Nov 2005, Ian Johnston remarked:
If I can't travel by train because they have a ban on quiet
enjoyment of a can of beer

If you /can't/ travel on a train without having a can of beer, you
have much worse problems than finding alternative transport.

It's the matter of principle about being told what I can and can't do
(where what I want to do doesn't significantly affect anyone else).

Refreshments are beside the point. Although I'd also object if they told
me I couldn't eat a sandwich I'd bought at the station buffet - the only
allowable one being three times the price on board the train.

Or that I could only read one particular newspaper because they had an
agreement with "The Sun" that they'd ban all others, and only sell the
Sun at £2 a copy. No-one ever died because they couldn't read the
Evening Standard on the train, or because they had to pay £2 for a
newspaper, but it's stupid to have those sorts of policies in place.

--
Roland Perry

Plan for dealing with obnoxious phone calls on trains?
 

In message , at
13:46:51 on Sat, 19 Nov 2005, Martin Underwood remarked:
limit the use of your mobile phone to essential details like "the train's
been delayed - I'll see you at this time at this place instead of what we
agreed before".

Of course, the first thing anyone you ring to say you are late says is
"Where the heck are you?"

It is extraordinarily difficult not to instinctively reply "on the
train" ...
--
Roland Perry

Plan for dealing with obnoxious phone calls on trains?
 

In message , at
13:30:37 on Sat, 19 Nov 2005, Tom Anderson
remarked:
And there are issues related to leaving ones seat (with or without
possessions left behind) and if the train is full and standing, moving
around it may not be an option.

In these situations, out of simple common courtesy to your fellow
passengers, you should refrain from making phone calls. If you
absolutely must make phone calls, don't take a train.

It's this sort of attitude that did indeed make me stop using the train
in 2001, and buy a better car instead, and use that. Although that made
sense for me, as a national policy it probably doesn't.

I've since moved houses and jobs several times, and am back using the
train quite often. On Monday I pick up a new (to me) car. The temptation
returns.
--
Roland Perry

Plan for dealing with obnoxious phone calls on trains?
 

On Sat, 19 Nov 2005 14:08:51 UTC, Roland Perry
wrote:

In message , at
13:46:51 on Sat, 19 Nov 2005, Martin Underwood remarked:
limit the use of your mobile phone to essential details like "the train's
been delayed - I'll see you at this time at this place instead of what we
agreed before".

Of course, the first thing anyone you ring to say you are late says is
"Where the heck are you?"

It is extraordinarily difficult not to instinctively reply "on the
train" ...

Anyway, I bet the most common first words of phone calls made from
payphones at Tebay service station are "I'm at Tebay service station".
It's a perfectly sensible thing to say.

Ian
--

Plan for dealing with obnoxious phone calls on trains?
 

Roland Perry wrote:
In message dzZo7CxomoOm-pn2-gf7OyjtMdIJK@localhost, at 13:21:49 on
Sat, 19 Nov 2005, Ian Johnston remarked:
If I can't travel by train because they have a ban on quiet
enjoyment of a can of beer

If you /can't/ travel on a train without having a can of beer, you
have much worse problems than finding alternative transport.

It's the matter of principle about being told what I can and can't do
(where what I want to do doesn't significantly affect anyone else).

Refreshments are beside the point. Although I'd also object if they
told me I couldn't eat a sandwich I'd bought at the station buffet -
the only allowable one being three times the price on board the train.

Or that I could only read one particular newspaper because they had an
agreement with "The Sun" that they'd ban all others, and only sell the
Sun at £2 a copy. No-one ever died because they couldn't read the
Evening Standard on the train, or because they had to pay £2 for a
newspaper, but it's stupid to have those sorts of policies in place.

On their property they can impose whatever rules they like.

Plan for dealing with obnoxious phone calls on trains?
 

Brimstone wrote in
:

On their property they can impose whatever rules they like.

Just because they can doesn't mean that they should. They still need to
justify any draconian rules: the "just because we can" justification doesn't
wash with me.

Plan for dealing with obnoxious phone calls on trains?
 

In message , at
15:16:27 on Sat, 19 Nov 2005, Brimstone
remarked:
On their property they can impose whatever rules they like.

Not quite. They can't impose rules prohibiting negroes, or pregnant
women, or cripples. And there is still a feeling that they are a public
service, and somewhat of a "natural monopoly", so they don't have the
absolute freedom you suggest.
--
Roland Perry

Plan for dealing with obnoxious phone calls on trains?
 

On Sat, 19 Nov 2005 15:22:40 -0000, Martin Underwood wrote in
, seen in
uk.railway:
Brimstone wrote in
:

On their property they can impose whatever rules they like.

Just because they can doesn't mean that they should. They still need to
justify any draconian rules: the "just because we can" justification doesn't
wash with me.

It doesn't _need_ to was with you, as long as it washes with the
courts.
--
Ross, a.k.a.
Prof. E. Scrooge, CT, 153 & bar, Doctor of Cynicism (U. Life), Diplom-Skeptiker (DB)
Hon. Pres., National Soc. for the Encouragement for Cruelty to Dogboxes
Proud to be the target of various trolls, sock puppets and other idiots

Plan for dealing with obnoxious phone calls on trains?
 

Martin Underwood wrote:
Brimstone wrote in
:

On their property they can impose whatever rules they like.

Just because they can doesn't mean that they should.

Agreed

They still need to justify any draconian rules:

No they don't.

the "just because we can" justification doesn't wash with me.

Nor I, but tough.

Plan for dealing with obnoxious phone calls on trains?
 

Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at
15:16:27 on Sat, 19 Nov 2005, Brimstone
remarked:
On their property they can impose whatever rules they like.

Not quite. They can't impose rules prohibiting negroes, or pregnant
women, or cripples. And there is still a feeling that they are a
public service, and somewhat of a "natural monopoly", so they don't
have the absolute freedom you suggest.

I suspect any intelligent person would recognise that "within the law of the
land" was implicit in my statement.

Plan for dealing with obnoxious phone calls on trains?
 

In message , at
16:08:49 on Sat, 19 Nov 2005, Brimstone
remarked:
On their property they can impose whatever rules they like.

Not quite. They can't impose rules prohibiting negroes, or pregnant
women, or cripples. And there is still a feeling that they are a
public service, and somewhat of a "natural monopoly", so they don't
have the absolute freedom you suggest.

I suspect any intelligent person would recognise that "within the law of the
land" was implicit in my statement.

Any rule not forbidden by the law, I suppose you mean. Which brings us
back to the laws which govern the actions of whoever the railways are
being regulated by this week. There should be some safeguards there
against the most extreme of the arbitrary rules that might be imposed
(while not being themselves overtly criminally illegal).

One recently discussed one which springs to mind is the "special"
ticketing of Megatrain, which is only allowed for an experimental
period.
--
Roland Perry

Plan for dealing with obnoxious phone calls on trains?
 

On Sat, 19 Nov 2005, Martin Underwood wrote:

Tom Anderson wrote in
:

and impossible in most modern EMU/DMU because they don't have
vestibules in the sense you probably mean.

There's always, i think, some area by the doors which, even though it's
not completely separated from the seating, is somewhat acoustically
separated, by distance and usually by perspex screens.

And there are issues related to leaving ones seat (with or without
possessions left behind) and if the train is full and standing,
moving around it may not be an option.

In these situations, out of simple common courtesy to your fellow
passengers, you should refrain from making phone calls. If you
absolutely must make phone calls, don't take a train.

I think it's possible to use a mobile phone on a train without annoying
other people. The rules are as follows:

- set your phone to vibrate so incoming calls don't disturb other people

- talk in a normal voice: don't shout

- try to shield yourself from the rest of the carriage as much as possible,
for instance by turning towards the side of the train beside the window

- limit the use of your mobile phone to essential details like "the train's
been delayed - I'll see you at this time at this place instead of what we
agreed before".

Basically, make your best effort to minimise the impact of your phone use
on others, by whatever means. I agree entirely - i think i was a bit harsh
in my previous post.

People who use mobile phones for prolonged business calls, as if the
train is an extension of their office, speaking in a loud voice and
talking about sensitive confidential matters, are worthy of contempt;
people who try to be discreet are not.

Precisely.

tom

--
Georgia New York Los Angeles Vegas Washington Utah

Plan for dealing with obnoxious phone calls on trains?
 

Brimstone wrote
Roland Perry wrote:
on Sat, 19 Nov 2005, Brimstone
remarked:

On their property they can impose whatever rules they like.

Not quite. They can't impose rules prohibiting negroes, or pregnant
women, or cripples. And there is still a feeling that they are a
public service, and somewhat of a "natural monopoly", so they don't
have the absolute freedom you suggest.

I suspect any intelligent person would recognise that "within the law
of the
land" was implicit in my statement.

But if the 'law of the land' is that rules & railway byelaws must be
reasonable and proportionate then 'any intelligent person would
recognise' that your statement was incorrect.

--
Mike D

Plan for dealing with obnoxious phone calls on trains?
 

On Fri, 18 Nov 2005 17:18:37 -0000, "Ivor Jones"
wrote:



"Laurence Payne"
wrote in message

On Fri, 18 Nov 2005 16:43:41 GMT, Methusalah
wrote:

Telephones ? You don't know you were ever born ! In
my young days, I'd travel around with a supply of
carrier pigeons to send messages back to base. And if
I got hungry, I'd eat one !

Careful. I think the RSPCA could get you retrospectively
for that. Note, no smiley. Sillier things happen.

Nothing illegal about eating pigeons, is there..? Pigeon pie, anyone..?

All the world seem in tune on a spring afternoon...

--
James Farrar
. @gmail.com

Plan for dealing with obnoxious phone calls on trains?
 

On Thu, 17 Nov 2005 23:10:34 +0000, M. J. Powell wrote:

In message , Roland
Perry writes
In message , at 14:02:52
on Thu, 17 Nov 2005, d remarked:
I don't care what people do on trains/busses/in public as long as it
doesn't affect other people. As soon as that happens, the perpetrator
has over-stepped the mark, and should stop.

So if someone insists on silence, and that affects someone who has an
important phone call to make...

If it was that important why wait until you're on a bus/train. Make it
before you leave.

If I could guarantee my arrival time coincided with the timetabled time I
wouldn't need to make any calls.

Plan for dealing with obnoxious phone calls on trains?
 

"Martin Underwood" typed


Tom Anderson wrote in
:

I think it's possible to use a mobile phone on a train without annoying
other people. The rules are as follows:

- set your phone to vibrate so incoming calls don't disturb other people
A quiet 'beep' is also acceptable, as it's almost imperceptble to
others, given the background noise of a train.

Turn keypad tones off; they annoy me and don't add to information if you
can see.

Make sure that your text alert setting is quiet.

- talk in a normal voice: don't shout
Agreed but difficult.

Communicate by text message where possible; more thought, less noise.

- try to shield yourself from the rest of the carriage as much as possible,
for instance by turning towards the side of the train beside the window

- limit the use of your mobile phone to essential details like "the train's
been delayed - I'll see you at this time at this place instead of what we
agreed before".

People who use mobile phones for prolonged business calls, as if the train
is an extension of their office, speaking in a loud voice and talking about
sensitive confidential matters, are worthy of contempt; people who try
to be
discreet are not.

The same is true for those who discuss their personal problems on the train...

--
Helen D. Vecht:
Edgware.

Plan for dealing with obnoxious phone calls on trains?
 

Tom Anderson typed


Basically, make your best effort to minimise the impact of your phone use
on others, by whatever means. I agree entirely - i think i was a bit harsh
in my previous post.

Were you? I agreed with what you'd written enough to add to it. Phones
can be tremendously useful to travellers, but they can and should be
TAMED!

--
Helen D. Vecht:
Edgware.

Plan for dealing with obnoxious phone calls on trains?
 

On Sun, 20 Nov 2005 10:29:09 GMT, Helen Deborah Vecht
wrote:

- set your phone to vibrate so incoming calls don't disturb other people
A quiet 'beep' is also acceptable, as it's almost imperceptble to
others, given the background noise of a train.

How kind of you to set out rules for me. Of course, I wouldn't hear
that quiet beep either :-)

Plan for dealing with obnoxious phone calls on trains?
 

On Sat, 19 Nov 2005 22:12:20 +0000, James Farrar
wrote:

All the world seem in tune on a spring afternoon...

I think it would be unwise to eat those particular ones.

--

Iain
the out-of-date hairydog guide to mobile phones
http://www.hairydog.co.uk/cell1.html
Browse now while stocks last!

Plan for dealing with obnoxious phone calls on trains?
 

In uk.telecom.mobile Ivor Jones wrote:


"Laurence Payne"
wrote in message

On Fri, 18 Nov 2005 16:31:55 -0000, "Ivor Jones"
wrote:

A bad analogy, and you know it.

Not so. My bus is my workplace, it is my office. I
don't see why people should be allowed to do what they
want in it.

It's your workplace, but not your office. Do try not to
be silly.

It's where I do my work, it is effectively my office. And you didn't
answer the question. Why should people be allowed to do as they please on
someone else's property, be it a bus, office, train or public toilet for
that matter (the bus does resemble the latter at the end of a day with the
kids round here..!)

They can't.
What they can do is set by the bus company - either through direct policy
or inaction.
It's not up to you - apart from whatever changes you may be able to force
through the courts or other actions.

If the bus company cared enough about non-paying passengers, they'd do
something.
If they thought that passengers playing loud music was significantly
impacting on their revenue, then they might try to do something...
Of course, a hell of a lot of revenue impact has to happen before they are
willing to spend the 10 quid an hour for another body.

Plan for dealing with obnoxious phone calls on trains?
 

Ivor Jones wrote in
:

"Laurence Payne"
wrote in message

On Fri, 18 Nov 2005 16:43:41 GMT, Methusalah
wrote:

Telephones ? You don't know you were ever born ! In
my young days, I'd travel around with a supply of
carrier pigeons to send messages back to base. And if
I got hungry, I'd eat one !

Careful. I think the RSPCA could get you retrospectively
for that. Note, no smiley. Sillier things happen.

Nothing illegal about eating pigeons, is there..? Pigeon pie,
anyone..?

"It's not against any religion / To want to dispose of a pigeon."

And similarly squirrel pie: "And maybe we'll do in / A squirrel or two."

Good old Tom Lehrer.

Plan for dealing with obnoxious phone calls on trains?
 

Andrew Yarnwood wrote:
I have a proposal for dealing with (punishing) people who make loud
business phone calls on trains (or any other public transport).
("I'm on the train ... buy! ... sell!")

I'm 6ft3, wide, and tend to wear lots of black. Going up and being
polite but firm in pointing out that the prohibition on making noise
in the Quiet Zone includes them can sometimes help.

Alas, their subsequent whining about how I'm being *so* unreasonable
by asking them to consider others for once can be more irritating than
their phone call. It is of course never their fault.

--
PGP key ID E85DC776 - finger for full key

Plan for dealing with obnoxious phone calls on trains?
 

"Roland Perry" wrote in message
.uk
In message , at 12:32:21
on Sat, 19 Nov 2005, Ivor Jones
remarked:
There are numerous signs up in many areas near where I
live claiming that the police have powers to restrict
people from drinking alcohol in the street. Now I'm one
of those that prefers to do my drinking in a pub, but
that doesn't mean I believe that people shouldn't be
able to drink in the street if they want to.

It's not just streets, such bans would extend to having a
can of beer with a picnic in the park.

Indeed.

As to drinking on trains, or buses or any other form of
public transport, then that is up to the operators of
said transport. If Virgin or whoever don't want you to
drink on their trains that's their business and if you
don't like it you don't have to travel with them. You
may not like that, I certainly don't, but it is still
up to them.

We are getting very much into the area of monopoly here.
If I can't travel by train because they have a ban on
quiet enjoyment of a can of beer, then there may not be
an obvious alternative for me. What if trains had a dress
codes (like some shopping centres) would that be OK too?

If it's private property, the owners of that property have an absolute
right to set conditions on people that enter. If you don't like those
conditions you don't have to enter. If you insist on being able to drink
beer while travelling and the train company says you can't, then that's
your tough luck. You can't smoke in many places now, I don't like that,
being a smoker, but I can't do anything about it.

As for dress codes, well I'd like to see one that bans those ghastly
shorts that some people insist on wearing, but that's me ;-)

Ivor

Plan for dealing with obnoxious phone calls on trains?
 

"Roland Perry" wrote in message
.uk

[snip]

Or that I could only read one particular newspaper
because they had an agreement with "The Sun" that they'd
ban all others, and only sell the Sun at £2 a copy.
No-one ever died because they couldn't read the Evening
Standard on the train, or because they had to pay £2 for
a newspaper, but it's stupid to have those sorts of
policies in place.

Stupid no doubt, but still their right if they choose. It's their
property.

Ivor

Plan for dealing with obnoxious phone calls on trains?
 

"Martin Underwood" wrote in message

Brimstone wrote in
:

On their property they can impose whatever rules they
like.

Just because they can doesn't mean that they should. They
still need to justify any draconian rules: the "just
because we can" justification doesn't wash with me.

Whether it washes with you or not is irrelevant. If they don't want you as
a customer then they're not obliged to take your money..!

Ivor

Plan for dealing with obnoxious phone calls on trains?
 

"Roland Perry" wrote in message
.uk
In message
, at
15:16:27 on Sat, 19 Nov 2005, Brimstone
remarked:
On their property they can impose whatever rules they
like.

Not quite. They can't impose rules prohibiting negroes,
or pregnant women, or cripples.

True, but we're talking about beer.

And there is still a
feeling that they are a public service, and somewhat of a
"natural monopoly", so they don't have the absolute
freedom you suggest.

They're not and they do, unfortunate though it is.

Ivor

Plan for dealing with obnoxious phone calls on trains?
 

"Martin Underwood" wrote in message


[snip]

"It's not against any religion / To want to dispose of a
pigeon."
And similarly squirrel pie: "And maybe we'll do in / A
squirrel or two."
Good old Tom Lehrer.

Indeed, I'd forgotten that one..!

Ivor

Plan for dealing with obnoxious phone calls on trains?
 

"steve" wrote in message


[snip]

If I could guarantee my arrival time coincided with the
timetabled time I wouldn't need to make any calls.

So how did you manage before mobile phones..? Trains were late in those
days as well, weren't they..?

Ivor

Plan for dealing with obnoxious phone calls on trains?
 

Ivor Jones wrote:
"steve" wrote in message


[snip]

If I could guarantee my arrival time coincided with the
timetabled time I wouldn't need to make any calls.

So how did you manage before mobile phones..? Trains were late in those
days as well, weren't they..?

Ivor


I remember making a phone call from a BT Phonecard phone in the
corridor of a 309 in the 1980s.

No one was interested in where I was though. (Come to think of it,
they aren't now either.)

Plan for dealing with obnoxious phone calls on trains?
 

On Sun, 20 Nov 2005, Helen Deborah Vecht wrote:

Tom Anderson typed

Basically, make your best effort to minimise the impact of your phone
use on others, by whatever means. I agree entirely - i think i was a
bit harsh in my previous post.

Were you? I agreed with what you'd written enough to add to it. Phones
can be tremendously useful to travellers, but they can and should be
TAMED!

I thought i was saying that nobody should use phones anywhere except the
vestibule. I think it's fine to use them at your seat, provided you do
your utmost to minimise the impact on others - keep it quiet and keep it
short.

tom

--
BUTTS LOL

Plan for dealing with obnoxious phone calls on trains?
 

In message , at 19:41:42 on Sun, 20 Nov
2005, Ivor Jones remarked:
Stupid no doubt, but still their right if they choose. It's their
property.

Although there are rules imposed upon them "from above". And not just
about obviously illegal things.
--
Roland Perry