|
|
| Re: WMATA Board Approves Fare Hike (536537) | |||
 |
|||
| Home > SubChat | |||
|
[ Read Responses | Post a New Response | Return to the Index ] |
|
||
|
Re: WMATA Board Approves Fare Hike |
|
|
Posted by Mirai Zikasu on Wed Dec 19 12:09:25 2007, in response to Re: WMATA Board Approves Fare Hike, posted by WMATAGMOAGH on Tue Dec 18 20:30:24 2007. "Please find where I have denied this sentiment."Well, I never explicitly said that you did. However, when you spoke as if my experiences on Metro were not important due to them being very unusual, I wanted to make sure that my argument's thesis was clear that there are problems on the Metro that need to be fixed because how often an individual experiences a problem is not as important as the matter that problems are happening. "However, to pass off your experience as "normal" would be quite a stretch from reality, and you should stop trying to do so." That I never did, period. My experiences are my own, and I have portrayed them as just that. However they compare with others' experiences on Metro is for others to decide. You are the one who is claiming that I describe my experiences as "normal" and dismissing me for your own self-fabricated delusion. The boldest I went in any of my statements was "Seeing how more people aren't speaking up with experiences on Metro similar to yours, I believe that would also make you an anomaly." Note the usage of also. Your experiences on Metro are on the same level as mine as are everyone else's because they are by nature individual experiences. My writings represent my own experiences rather than some narcissistic claim that my vision of Metro is the exact representation of normal commuting experience, and you are free to look back and verify this if you wish. "As Ron would say, do your homework. It wasn't Richard White's project, either." It happened in the last two months of his tenure. It was either his project or that of someone under him. News articles that I have read including that of the Washington Post, the Christian Science Monitor, and Metro's own site cited the Metro spokeswoman, a few consultants, and "Metro officials." If it wasn't White, it was at least one of the people under him. If it was neither White nor someone under him, then a little help rather than a snide "do your homework" would be appreciated when I have not offered you the same rudeness. "Your experience on the Blue Line sounds like you got one of the trains that first had the announcements, and then they redid it once it had been piloted to make it work better. They probably decided there was no need to update the trains they used for the pilot, and you got one of those. There are only 6-12 of those, if even that many. Is it really that big a deal?" For the record, it was car 5080 on October 7th. The message was as follows. "Step back...so customers may exit. When boarding move to the center of the car." I found a press release that I had missed before mentioning this variation, and so, you're probably be right. For the most part, it just surprised me as I heard it after this year's October LunchTalk when someone else passed on a complaint about the new recordings. This other recording was slightly more curt and done in a softer tone though it seemed almost choppy as if some words had been cut out and the remainder spliced back together. It was a bit of a big deal at that moment to me as it seemed as if it was a late acknowledgment of discontent for the new recordings and an attempt to backtrack on the verbosity and forceful tone that came with the recordings' new authoritative, bossy quality sought in the voice contest. As I didn't know that Metro did test recordings and then revised them, I suppose that makes what I heard nothing more than an unchanged test. Anyway, I talk about it as I hate the new voice recordings. If there is any little issue that I take up with Metro, it is that. I understand that it is unlikely that the old, pleasant recordings will be resurrected, but change is slow, and as evident by the LunchTalk chat back in October, Metro still acknowledges discontent for the new recordings from people other than me. So there's an ever so small hope that they might change it back. You can't have it both ways. Yes, the sound system doesn't work too well with the vaults, but they are working to improve the quality of announcements. PIMS cannot be relied on for all system announcements, many of those displays are poorly placed and are obstructed, not to mention, they are difficult to see from far away. if they didn't make announcements, you would be complaining that they weren't keeping you informed of delays and that the system is horrible. I think the balance is fairly appropriate. You seem to forget there was once a time where there were no PIMS displays, information about delays and elevator outages was only able to be relayed over the station's PA system, and you had no idea how many minutes away the next train was until you could see its headlights or the edge lights flashed. I don't want it both ways. I'd rather either see the majority on the PIMS or hear the majority over the loudspeaker, not everything on both or nothing on neither. Redundant, verbose information on both is excessive and annoying. Service advisories and elevator outages seem to show well on the PIMS, and most people probably don't pay attention to the "see it, say it" campaigns or whatever is being muttered about in Spanish over the loudspeakers regardless of their audibility, anyway. If usage of the loudspeakers isn't eliminated, at least reduce the frequency so that Mister and Miss Chatty Cathy Public Service Announcement doesn't go shooting their mouths off every five minutes with the same repeated public service announcements. Also, no, I wouldn't be complaining if they cut the public service announcements and reduced service advisories to one medium or the other. I check WMATA.com for service advisories anymore so I know beforehand what I'm getting into when I head off to the Metro. I also remember very well what the Metro was like before the PIMS system. I don't remember the announcements, but I remember waiting for a train, not knowing what would show up or when it would come. Without the PIMS system, though, at least the PA systems were the only thing used for announcements. I say lose the verbose, droning PSAs for people to "see it, say it" and Metro's "Please excuse our failure to provide you decent service, and we thank you for putting up with riding the Metrorail system." (Sarcasm) "Foggy Bottom is one of the darkest stations in the system. They need to improve the lighting there, and that was a fine first step. Now they need to finish with the rest of the station. Many Metro managers have talked about improving lighting, none of them ever seem to actually do it." That would be because they did it wrong, and their fine first step was off a cliff. Rather than clean the lights of the existing station or replace old bulbs with new fluorescents, they ripped out the installations under the mezzanine and installed the bug zappers instead. The lighting in that station is now unequal, unpleasant, and downright jarring to the point where even Catoe himself agreed that it was bad to use those lights. (His response is to the third question from the bottom.) To me, as long as one is sure to open his eyes, there is no Metro station that too dark. If Metro MUST increase the lighting though, they have to do it properly, gradually, and with regard to station aesthetics, not by installing a bunch of bug zapper spotlights directly over people's heads. "Wake up already. White, Tangherlini, and Catoe have all done this, but clearly you (and the local politicians and feds) paid no attention. Ever hear of the MetroMatters program? Expansion money is separate from operating/maintenance funds, we've been through that already, and the system will be expanded further. Running additional 8 car trains is a major change if you ask me. What do you consider it to be?" I've had my coffee already, thank you. And thank you for the correction in regards to White's efforts to increase Metro's funding. I was wrong about him as I forgot about the Metro Matters program. So, then, White made efforts to lobby for improved Metro's funding back in 2004. Okay. Still, the system rotted under his leadership with excessive usage of quick fixes. I never said anything about Tangherlini as it seems there was push to get dedicated funding during his tenure. As for Catoe, what has he done besides say "Cut costs and service; raise fares" is nothing. No lobbying, no "Please contact your representative to support us," just "Cut costs and service; raise fares." The system will one day be expanded further, but when? The last I checked, the Tysons Corner expansion was still amusing the NIMBY tunnel people and getting caught up in how to fully fund the project. As for service changes, eight car trains are great if one can ride at rush hour. However, when Metro balances it out by forcing more people in the off hours to cram into four car trains, that's bad. Given the problem that people who couldn't fit onto one train would have to wait up to another fifteen minutes, that really bad. So bad, that I would say it negates the extra capacity at rush hour due to the difference in frequency. A public transportation system can't run with all focus on rush hour alone. "I stand by my earlier statement. You can't judge Mr. Catoe just yet." I'm afraid that I'm not comfortable with the thought of sitting back with my mouth shut for the next five years watching service stagnate and fare rise. A month is a short time. Half a year is a short time. A year of virtually nothing but a fare increase is pushing it. |
|
|
|