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...

--
Roland Perry

Roland Perry wrote:
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...

Tough ****.

On Thu, 17 Nov 2005 14:02:52 GMT, "d" wrote:


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.

There's affecting and affecting. I detect an urge to ban things. A
mind-set that won't laugh off a minor annoyance.

Laurence Payne wrote:
On Thu, 17 Nov 2005 14:02:52 GMT, "d" wrote:


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.

There's affecting and affecting. I detect an urge to ban things. A
mind-set that won't laugh off a minor annoyance.

The only reason that restrictions are imposed is because a minority of
people can't or won't show respect and consideration for others.

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.

Mike
--
M.J.Powell

"Laurence Payne"
wrote in message

On Wed, 16 Nov 2005 19:31:14 -0000, "Ivor Jones"
wrote:

But there isn't room for *all* of us in there..! The
whole train should be phone-free. As should buses for
that matter.

Yes dear. Some of us are on that train not for the pure
pleasure of travel, but because we're rushing around
trying to make a living. Customers need attention NOW.
Or they go elsewhere. It's a privilege to have
employment now. Let us get on with it.

How did you ever manage in business before mobile phones were invented,
"dear"..?

Incidentally, my living is driving buses, I don't see why I should spend
my entire working day subjected to other people's noisy conversations. Or
shall I come and park myself in your office all day and make phone
calls..?

Ivor

"Laurence Payne"
wrote in message

On Thu, 17 Nov 2005 14:02:52 GMT, "d"
wrote:


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.

There's affecting and affecting. I detect an urge to
ban things. A mind-set that won't laugh off a minor
annoyance.

It's not a minor annoyance when you're subject to it for seven hours or
more a day. See my other post in this thread.

Ivor

On Fri, 18 Nov 2005 00:35:08 -0000, "Ivor Jones"
wrote:

Or they go elsewhere. It's a privilege to have
employment now. Let us get on with it.

How did you ever manage in business before mobile phones were invented,
"dear"..?

How did you make a living before 'busses were invented?

There was a time when you could say "I'm not ruining my front door by
cutting out a letter-box!". When you could say "I refuse to install
a 'phone! If they want me, let them write!". When not having an
answering machine, a fax, email were possible options. When you
could say "I'm traveling today. I'll be out of touch for several
hours!".

None of these are currently possible. Tough, ain't it?




Incidentally, my living is driving buses, I don't see why I should spend
my entire working day subjected to other people's noisy conversations. Or
shall I come and park myself in your office all day and make phone
calls..?

A bad analogy, and you know it.

In message , at
22:27:29 on Thu, 17 Nov 2005, Brimstone
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...

Tough ****.

Glad we got that one sorted. Tough **** can work both ways, of course.
--
Roland Perry

In message , at 23:10:34 on Thu,
17 Nov 2005, M. J. Powell remarked:
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.

You may be on the train, which like one I was travelling to London on
recently, grinds to a halt for twenty minutes just before arriving at
the terminus (it eventually got to West Hampstead and turned everyone
off to trudge to the tube station in the rain). You may need to warn
people you are late.

Catch an earlier train, I hear you starting to say. Well, sadly, I find
I do have to anyway because of their unreliability, and infrequency. I
live on a route with effectively one per hour. Although I can get from
the terminus to the meeting in 30 minutes, I do need to catch the train
which gets me to the terminus at 12.15 for a 2pm meeting, because the
1.15 is cutting it too fine.

Meanwhile, the world does not stop revolving when you are on a train - I
was halfway to London on a two hour train journey yesterday when one of
the co-organisers of the meeting I was going to rang me to ask an
important procedural question. Fifty other people could have been
inconvenienced if I had been unable to answer it promptly.

What, I hear you ask, would I have done before the days of mobile
phones? I've had one since 1988, so we are going back a fair way, but
the answer is that I employed a fulltime secretary to organise such
things for me when I was otherwise uncontactable, and whose job it was
to make sure that when I went out she knew the landline numbers of
everywhere I was likely to be (and the names of the secretaries of all
the people I was visiting).

This has all changed in the name of "greater efficiency and
productivity", and people are more demanding, too.
--
Roland Perry