Re: Does not commute: CityRail's shame file

["Chris Downs" <cvdowns@ozemail.com.au>]

Tezza <tezza2000@dingoblue.net.au> wrote in message
3a9baacd$0$25491$7f31c96c@news01.syd.optusnet.com.au">news:3a9baacd$0$25491$7f31c96c@news01.syd.optusnet.com.au...
>
> "Chris Downs"
> | Tezza <
> | > "Chris Downs"
> | > | Tezza
> | > | > "Chris Downs" | >
>
> | > | > | These were CityRail's worst services not the average.  Strange how
> | > | > | CityRail didn't give figures for the best!
> | > | >
> | > | > They did according to that article. "As State Rail bosses prepare to
> lobby
> | > | > to increase fares by an average 3.3 per cent from July, they have
> released
> | > | > data which shows the 20 worst and 20 best services, and the strategy
> they
> | > | > hope will fix the problem."
> | > |
> | > | "The best services were, in the morning, the 6.05 from North Sydney
> and the
> | > | 6.21 and 7.04 from Hornsby and, in the evening, the train due at
> Turrella by
> | > | 5.33.  Otime percentages were not given" - 5 paras later from the SMH
> article.
> | >
> | > You complained they didn't provide figures for the best, the article
> says
> | > they did. You didn't say anything about on-time percentages.
> |
> | For one who preaches a need for improved comprehension in your aus.rail
> | postings your ability to bastardise context is laudable (do I need to
> | elucidate on the context of laudable?).
>
> You complained they didn't provide figures for the best services. When I
> pointed out that they did you then specified a different requirement not
> first mentioned.

If you'd addressed context I may have believed you were being other than
disingenuous.

Chris