Last edited by ninelives; 29th May 2008 at 11:03 PM.
this is also online? what the....
such views must b from a calculative extremist! if many things in life oso 1 2 culculate who gets how much more advantage in every aspect in life to e last drop i !
the person who 'observe' this 'cheating' is very free
almost same as those who are 'cheating' the mrt fare
I agree that person is extremely calculative. To me, it is not cheating and it's just some people who are smart enough to be proactive and get a seat for themselves.
Maybe the person is just sore about not being able to get a seat and feels that no one cares for him/her when he/she was feeling tired. I bet there are many others in the train that feels equally tired.
The 'Stay to the Left' campaign has started long long ago but it has worked to some success la. In London, I think it's "stay to the right." Correct me if I'm wrong. The English used to believe they have taught manners to the world, but nowadays, not so true anymore?
Some folks in Singapore couldn't follow the act and stood on the right, when there was an obvious line of commuters on the left of the escalator in front of them.
I think the worse thing is not giving way to commuters exiting the train. SMRT has painstakingly painted the yellow lines and arrows to indicate where should people stand to wait to board trains. Some are unfortunately won't pay attention to it. I'm sure they are not blind right?
nah...this is not considered cheating. i wonder if that chap ever fall asleep and miss his stop before. and did he walk out the gates then tap his card and come in again or did he just cross the platform and take the train back the way he came?
if you think about it, consider the weight of the mrt train. consider the fuel consumed by the additional load of one extra passenger, like you say it is negligible. if we want to measure like that, sooner or later will have some coconut put on stomp that the train company cheating him of money, the train stop 1 cm short of its correct stopping position.
Lol yeah that's true. Anyway I'm guilty of doing that too when trains get too crowded at city hall, I'd take it to marina bay and back. :P
As much as I would like to think that the ST editors are having a good laugh at these people who send in these stupid letters, and publishing these letters so that we can have a good laugh at them, I don't think the paper is intelligent enough to do that.
It's just a bad newspaper, period.
Last edited by entropy_h; 30th May 2008 at 10:00 AM.
Actually if I am not wrong, the gantry does calculate the time you are supposed to take from one station to another. Say example Newton to Dover supposed to take you average 20 minutes give and take. If you exit at Dover and clock up more time than the allocated time, you will get charged for it. It is based on the calculations on how many stations you could have passed in that time.
Hence even if you go to terminal and then come back... you are still paying extra.... no free ride...
Perhaps that guy is staying in Pasir Ris so he think he got the first priority to get the seat hehe... If i m the train operator, i will tell him to do the same to travel to tampines cross to the other platform take back to Pasir Ris then he will get a seat...
I can do that but would you or SMRT buy it? I had designed more complex machines/equipments than this. If you just think out of the box there are lots of things you can do. Imagine what the world would be if film had not been invented? we would all be still holding a drawing board instead of a DSLR.
I was putting out the idea since TS is so concerned about getting a seat on the train. If TS were to get a seat, would he had complained about how many stops you had "cheated"?
Main problem = no seat
cause (according to TS) = ppl taking the seat from the reverse direction.
my solution = make seat avaliable. its only fair for sitting passengers to pay more than standing passangers
alternative solution = SMRT to force everyone out of the train at the end of the station but its quite impossible for Jurong East station.
(You here does not refer to an individual, it refer to everyone reading.)