Poll Question...
Ben Parrish
You come across a quaint gift shop. Among the various goodies that are
sitting around are :
1. A mysterious silver charm which is reputed to have magical powers.
2. A People magazine.
#1 is required to get past the dra- uhh...the evil raisin monster.
#2 is totally worthless (in the context of the game, of course.)
Certainly you should be able to buy #1 and carry it around. Now, how 'bout
#2? Would you prefer the game say "There's no time to read this nonsense
now," or do you like a modicum of useless but realistic crap to interact
with?
--
Ben Parrish :: http://www.rvi.net/~bparrish
Michael Gaul
> You come across a quaint gift shop. Among the various goodies that are
> sitting around are :
>
> 1. A mysterious silver charm which is reputed to have magical powers.
> 2. A People magazine.
>
> #1 is required to get past the dra- uhh...the evil raisin monster.
> #2 is totally worthless (in the context of the game, of course.)
>
> Certainly you should be able to buy #1 and carry it around. Now, how 'bout
> #2? Would you prefer the game say "There's no time to read this nonsense
> now," or do you like a modicum of useless but realistic crap to interact
> with?
I think this question cannot be answered in general because two
principles
of "good" i-f writing are in conflict here. One is "Be Realistic" - if
the
player knows that every item he can carry along will be needed in a
puzzle,
this disturbs the atmosphere of the game. And a shop with only one
buyable
item would be quite silly.
The other principle is "Don't make the game too difficult". The player
can't tell whether the magazine is totally worthless (i.e. a red
herring)
or whether it will actually be necessary at some point.
As a player, I tend to carry *everything* with me, in case I might need
it
later. In large games, like "Curses" or "Jigsaw", near the end my
inventory
puts every flea market to shame. This however makes solving the puzzles
more difficult; there are too many distractors that lead my thoughts
away
from the "right" path.
My personal answer is: it depends on the kind of game you're writing. In
a difficult, puzzle-intensive game I would be very careful about the
number
of red herrings. In an easier game, where the fun emerges from freedom
of
action rather than from tackling puzzles, I'd code more "useless" items
to enhance realism and atmosphere. (But even then, to come back to your
"shop" example, I would make sure that the player has enough resources
to
acquire the necessary objects even if he first chose the "realistic
crap".)
Michael
What? You still want an answer to your poll? Okay, I prefer games with
many realistic objects and *very* *easy* *puzzles*. I like it even more
when the "red herrings" interact with the game's other objects. For
example:
> GIVE MAGAZINE TO DRAGON
The dragom browses through the magazine, mumbling comments like
"Oh, tasty!", "Naaah - too old!", or "Just why are all the women so bony
and skinny nowadays? <sigh>".
Den of Iniquity
>You come across a quaint gift shop. Among the various goodies that are
>sitting around are :
>
>1. A mysterious silver charm which is reputed to have magical powers.
>2. A People magazine.
What's a People magazine? Apart from
> totally worthless (in the context of the game, of course.)
I'm not personally fond of red herrings of this sort. A shop full of
trinkets with one item that catches your eye is one thing ("careful where
you stick that thing, you could have someone's eye ou... Oh, sorry sir!").
A shop full of brik-a-brak in which two things catch your eye, only one of
which is useful, seems _incomplete_ in some way.
--
Den
Iain Merrick
Hmmm... in several LucasArts games, they _really_ go for the red
herrings. For instance, in Monkey Island II there's a library with
dozens of books in it, _all_ of which you can read. (You only get a
sentence or two of description in each case, but most of the
descriptions are quite amusing.)
All this is good for laughs, but it can become irritating in at least
two ways:
- if the useful objects are indistinguishable from the useless objects,
it can be _very_ difficult to find them. (The Monkey Island II library
is a good example, if you miss the vital clues.)
- if you have to experiment with several useless objects before you get
your hands on the useful objects, replaying the game can become very
tedious - you're forced to plough through the same jokes over and over.
(This happens in Fate Of Atlantis, IIRC.)
I say go for the red herrings, but make it relatively easy for both
first-time players and people replaying the game to spot them and/or
avoid them.
--
Iain Merrick
Andrew Plotkin
> New game. Download, run.
> You come across a quaint gift shop. Among the various goodies that are
> sitting around are :
> 1. A mysterious silver charm which is reputed to have magical powers.
> 2. A People magazine.
These are two different games.
If they're in the same game, you've already done the work of communicating
a world where these items can both interestingly occur. So they're both
interesting.
--Z
--
"And Aholibamah bare Jeush, and Jaalam, and Korah: these were the
borogoves..."
or...@isdn.net.il
post. Please forgive any grammar/spelling errors, as english is not my native
language (I'm from Israel) ]
In article <36A875...@cs.york.ac.uk>,
Iain Merrick <i...@cs.york.ac.uk> wrote:
>
> Hmmm... in several LucasArts games, they _really_ go for the red
> herrings. For instance, in Monkey Island II there's a library with
> dozens of books in it, _all_ of which you can read. (You only get a
> sentence or two of description in each case, but most of the
> descriptions are quite amusing.)
>
I do not consider these red herrings, because the *puzzle* is to find out
which of the books are important. If only the two important book were
takable, there would be no puzzle in the situation. I would compare this
situation with the scene from Balances where there is a winning lottery
ticket among a large number of other, identical tickets. I'm sure you'd
aggree those are not red herrings. The fact that the books in MI2 are a bit
more interactive and that each produces a unique, irrelevant message when
trying to read them does not mean they aren't there for a game-related
reason.
I think that the origianl poster's situation is similiar. If I would come upon
a shop in a game, where two items are available, and I can buy only one, I'd
consider it a puzzle -- I'll probably explore other parts of the game, looking
for a situation in which one of those can be helpful before buying one.
--
Oren Ronen
or...@isdn.net.il
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
Den of Iniquity
> Den of Iniquity wrote:
>> On Thu, 21 Jan 1999, Ben Parrish wrote:
>>> 1. A mysterious silver charm which is reputed to have magical
>>> powers.
>>> 2. A People magazine.
>> A shop full of brik-a-brak in which two things catch your eye, only
>> one of which is useful, seems _incomplete_ in some way.
[examples of amusing red herrings snipped]
> I say go for the red herrings, but make it relatively easy for both
> first-time players and people replaying the game to spot them and/or
> avoid them.
Definitely. Perhaps I cut myself off a bit prematurely. What I meant to
say is that two prominent items in a bunch of tat - one of which is useful
- doesn't work for me as a 'fair' red herring. Half a dozen prominent
items in a bunch of tat - one of which is useful - feels much better. But
I agree that it should be easy to determine which is important, if not
immediately, then at least before the player gets into an 'unwinnable
state'.
--
Den
Wildman, the Cuberstalker
wrote:
>#2 is totally worthless (in the context of the game, of course.)
>
>Certainly you should be able to buy #1 and carry it around. Now, how 'bout
>#2? Would you prefer the game say "There's no time to read this nonsense
>now," or do you like a modicum of useless but realistic crap to interact
>with?
I prefer scarlet herrings to the reverse - where a useful item (or even
important one) is labeled "nonsense". I *have* played games where I spent
hours trying to solve a puzzle only to discover I needed that piece of junk
I left behind.
Of course, this only applies if there are no weight restrictions. In that
case, every item must be useful - otherwise, the game is a bit unfair.
--
Wildman, the Cuberstalker
Thank you, Microsoft, and please get out of the way.
Fight spam - http://www.cauce.org/
DO NOT SPAM THIS ADDRESS
Erik Max Francis
> 1. A mysterious silver charm which is reputed to have magical
> powers.
> 2. A People magazine.
>
> #1 is required to get past the dra- uhh...the evil raisin monster.
> #2 is totally worthless (in the context of the game, of course.)
>
> Certainly you should be able to buy #1 and carry it around. Now, how
> 'bout
> #2? Would you prefer the game say "There's no time to read this
> nonsense
> now," or do you like a modicum of useless but realistic crap to
> interact
> with?
It seems to me that adding new objects for "atmosphere" is well and good
to make things more realistic, but is this really more realistic? Out
of all everything in the gift shop, only two are concretified into
manipulable objects?
i.e., the player gets the impression that out of everything in the shop,
these two objects are the most important. So maybe, the player will
conclude, the _People_ magazine is important for something as well.
One too many red herrings spoils the pot.
--
Erik Max Francis / email m...@alcyone.com / whois mf303 / icq 16063900
Alcyone Systems / irc maxxon (efnet) / finger m...@finger.alcyone.com
San Jose, CA / languages En, Eo / web http://www.alcyone.com/max/
USA / icbm 37 20 07 N 121 53 38 W / &tSftDotIotE
\
/ Fear is an emotion indispensible for survival.
/ Hannah Arendt
Adam Cadre
> Hmmm... in several LucasArts games, they _really_ go for the red
> herrings. For instance, in Monkey Island II there's a library with
> dozens of books in it, _all_ of which you can read. (You only get a
> sentence or two of description in each case, but most of the
> descriptions are quite amusing.)
Why, thank you.
See, the fact that they had so many books to code meant that the
game designers were a bit hard up for material. So one day, I'm
hanging out in my dorm room when a couple LucasArts people (code-
named "Purple" and "T" -- apparently there's an overlap between
people who design computer games for a living and people who think
code names are kewl) come to visit my roommate, who was a tester for
them at the time. They drop off an alpha-test version of Monkey II --
and also a list of suggestions for books for the card catalog. So
my roommate fills in some, and I fill in some... and then a few months
later the game comes out, and I'm delighted to find that about half a
dozen of my suggestions have made it into the game. (And none of
Bret's did, which gave me something to lord over him for the rest of
the semester.)
On the other hand, he got a code name and I didn't. Life is so
unfair.
-----
Adam Cadre, Anaheim, CA
http://208.246.163.14/adam
Daniel Barkalow
> Den of Iniquity wrote:
>
> > I'm not personally fond of red herrings of this sort. A shop full of
> > trinkets with one item that catches your eye is one thing ("careful where
> > you stick that thing, you could have someone's eye ou... Oh, sorry sir!").
> > A shop full of brik-a-brak in which two things catch your eye, only one of
> > which is useful, seems _incomplete_ in some way.
>
> Hmmm... in several LucasArts games, they _really_ go for the red
> herrings. For instance, in Monkey Island II there's a library with
> dozens of books in it, _all_ of which you can read. (You only get a
> sentence or two of description in each case, but most of the
> descriptions are quite amusing.)
>
> I say go for the red herrings, but make it relatively easy for both
> first-time players and people replaying the game to spot them and/or
> avoid them.
Personally, I think there should be lots of items which are potentially
useful, but not necessary; you need the charm for the dragon, but if you
have the People magazine, you can find out about the local knight
service, which you may be able to convince to handle your dragon
problems.
That is, every object should have a use, although not necessarily a
particularly good one. You shouldn't need anything that you didn't have a
reason to take when you saw it, and the distractors should be reasonably
clearly irrelevent to the puzzle at hand (or should work at least
partially).
I'd like to see a game that you can win without some important item if
you use a bunch of red herrings correctly.
-Iabervon
*This .sig unintentionally changed*
Ben Parrish
>of all everything in the gift shop, only two are concretified into
Small gift shop. :)
Chris Carlson
Am I right?
--- Chris
On Fri, 22 Jan 1999 14:38:42 GMT, erky...@netcom.com (Andrew Plotkin)
wrote:
J. Wells
On Fri, 22 Jan 1999, Ben Parrish wrote:
> Small gift shop. :)
Stationfall, of course, had a nice workaround to this; I, for one, was
perfectly willing to believe that the Patrol, in its nigh-cosmic
ineptitude, would stock the PX on Gamma-Gamma-Delta with a single vending
machine chock full of only two-three saleable items.
Ye gosh, I wish I could play those two for the first time again... :)
--Lluth/J.C.Wells
Andrew Plotkin
> On Fri, 22 Jan 1999 14:38:42 GMT, erky...@netcom.com (Andrew Plotkin)
> wrote:
> >These are two different games.
> >
> >If they're in the same game, you've already done the work of communicating
> >a world where these items can both interestingly occur. So they're both
> >interesting.
> You seem to me like somebody who enjoys reading Douglas Hofstadter.
> Am I right?
If you'd asked me this during the Halting Problem thread, I would have
understood.
What brought it up now? I thought I was answering quite directly, albeit
with a polite assumption that the game in question did not suck.
Chris Carlson
My guess is actually the result of both reading that thread (as far as
I could without developing headaches) and your response to the poll
question.
Years ago, I spirited "Metamagical Themas" away from my mother, and
spent some time trying to understand the contents. It became a source
of amazement to me that this fellow existed in a world so suffused
with both creativity and logic. The response that triggered my
question to you was simply a 'trigger' that led me to think that you
lived in that kind of world as well.
Count me among the jealous.
--- Chris
On Fri, 22 Jan 1999 21:27:53 GMT, erky...@netcom.com (Andrew Plotkin)
wrote:
>
Rene van 't Veen
Ben Parrish wrote in message <36a80...@news1.uswest.net>...
>New game. Download, run.
>
>You come across a quaint gift shop. Among the various goodies that
are
>sitting around are :
>
powers.
>2. A People magazine.
>
>#1 is required to get past the dra- uhh...the evil raisin monster.
>#2 is totally worthless (in the context of the game, of course.)
>
>Certainly you should be able to buy #1 and carry it around. Now, how
'bout
>#2? Would you prefer the game say "There's no time to read this
nonsense
>now," or do you like a modicum of useless but realistic crap to
interact
>with?
>
I would want #2 to be realistic if the game goes for mood and
atmosphere. It would then make the game-world more complete and
'credible'. On the other hand: if one of the game's hurdles is
an inventory restriction of some kind, I probably wouldn't, it
would be to easy to paint yourself in corner as a player.
Now, in this particular case, a game-world model where *both*
a charm with a reputation of magical powers *and* a People magazine
are credible, co-existent objects is pretty hard to imagine.
Especially a game where the magical charm is the useful object
(It wasn't too hard to imagine a world where the magazine would
be useful and the charm wouldn't).
----
"Would you tell me, please, which way I ought to go from here?"
"That depends a good deal on where you want to get to," said the Cat
---
(remove nospam to email me)
Rene van 't Veen - r.n_o_s_p_...@wxs.nospam.nl
green_g...@my-dejanews.com
Michael Gaul <ga...@rz.uni-potsdam.de> wrote:
> What? You still want an answer to your poll? Okay, I prefer games with
> many realistic objects and *very* *easy* *puzzles*. I like it even more
> when the "red herrings" interact with the game's other objects. For
> example:
>
> > GIVE MAGAZINE TO DRAGON
>
> The dragom browses through the magazine, mumbling comments like
> "Oh, tasty!", "Naaah - too old!", or "Just why are all the women so bony
> and skinny nowadays? <sigh>".
I vote for this one! I love stuff like this... wish there was more.
Kathleen
-- Excuse me while I dance a little jig of despair.
The Freebern Family
> The dragom browses through the magazine, mumbling comments like
> "Oh, tasty!", "Naaah - too old!", or "Just why are all the women so bony
> and skinny nowadays? <sigh>".
Bravo, Michael! I applaud your style, and I agree wholeheartedly.
-r
Den of Iniquity
> Ben Parrish wrote in message <36a80...@news1.uswest.net>...
>> You come across a quaint gift shop. Among the various goodies that
>> are sitting around are :
>> 1. A mysterious silver charm which is reputed to have magical
>> powers.
>> 2. A People magazine.
> I would want #2 to be realistic if the game goes for mood...
What bothers me is how many people think that #2 is the odd one out.
There I am, looking for postcards of York to send short sarcastic messages
to people who have more interesting holidays than I do; I pop into a shop
I've not been in before because the proprietor seems to have cheaper
postcards than most. In among all the trinkets and pin-badges of Yorkshire
roses, St George's Crosses, minsters and old red telephone boxes, I spy a
small collection of magazines that seem to have parted company with a wad
of Sunday papers. Picking up a People magazine and noting that it's from
1994 or something, the proprietor draws my attention to a little,
tarnished, silvery, celtic whorl that's dangling from a thin thread
between her fingers. With a glint in her one good eye she breathily
whispers that the charm has magical powers. Recoiling rapidly from the
stench of her breath I fall backwards over the doorstep and out of the
shop; I'm halfway down Lower Petergate before I realise I'm still
clutching the People magazine...
Whoops, didn't mean to illustrate so much. Anyway. Indiana Jones mixed
20th century with magic. Why must we always see magic and dragons as
belonging to fantasy worlds so unlike our own?
--
Den
Iain Merrick
[...]
> I'm halfway down Lower Petergate before I realise I'm still
> clutching the People magazine...
BTW, 'Lower Petergate' refers to a street, rather than some sort of
scandal involving Lower Peter.
(I thought I'd better point that out, in case anyone got the wrong
impression.)
Magnus Olsson
Iain Merrick <i...@cs.york.ac.uk> wrote:
>Den of Iniquity wrote:
>[...]
>> I'm halfway down Lower Petergate before I realise I'm still
>> clutching the People magazine...
>
>BTW, 'Lower Petergate' refers to a street, rather than some sort of
>scandal involving Lower Peter.
And, just as an interesting fact, the word "gate" has nothing
whatsoever to do with the usual English noun "gate"; it's the
Scandinavian word for "street". Street names ending in "gate" are
common in northeast England - a memory of the Viking occupation
(the Vikings made York their capital).
--
Magnus Olsson (m...@df.lth.se, zeb...@pobox.com)
------ http://www.pobox.com/~zebulon ------
Iain Merrick
> In article <36AC7B...@cs.york.ac.uk>,
> Iain Merrick <i...@cs.york.ac.uk> wrote:
> >Den of Iniquity wrote:
> >[...]
> >> I'm halfway down Lower Petergate before I realise I'm still
> >> clutching the People magazine...
> >
> >BTW, 'Lower Petergate' refers to a street, rather than some sort of
> >scandal involving Lower Peter.
>
> And, just as an interesting fact, the word "gate" has nothing
> whatsoever to do with the usual English noun "gate"; it's the
> Scandinavian word for "street". Street names ending in "gate" are
> common in northeast England - a memory of the Viking occupation
> (the Vikings made York their capital).
Yes. And the actual gates are called bars. This is nothing to do with
bars as in pubs, which are called pubs. Oh, those wacky Vikings!
Whoever founded the city of New York must have had these confusing names
in mind when they did so. Why else would they have called New York, New
York New York, New York?
Joyce Haslam
Magnus Olsson <m...@bartlet.df.lth.se> wrote:
> >BTW, 'Lower Petergate' refers to a street, rather than some sort of
> >scandal involving Lower Peter.
> And, just as an interesting fact, the word "gate" has nothing
> whatsoever to do with the usual English noun "gate"; it's the
> Scandinavian word for "street". Street names ending in "gate" are
> common in northeast England - a memory of the Viking occupation
> (the Vikings made York their capital).
Yes, and the northeast of England was a rather larger fraction than
one might think :-)
The Danelaw was all the area north of the Roman road Watling Street:
from Richborough in Kent through London and St Albans to Wroxeter
on the Welsh Marches.
Hence (?) the belief in the south of England that the north begins at
Watford.
Joyce.
--
Joyce Haslam imho e&oe Lancashire, England
http://www.argonet.co.uk/users/dljhaslam/infrm.html
for Gateway to Karos [INFORM 5]
Simon 'tufty' Stapleton
> Hence (?) the belief in the south of England that the north begins at
> Watford.
Ever been to Watford? It's 'orrible. Quite enough to make you want
to turn around and go back to London. Hence "It's grim oop north".
Simon
--
_______ _______
| ----- | Biased output from the demented brain of | ----- |
||MacOS|| Simon Stapleton. ||Linux||
|| 8.5 || || PPC ||
| ----- | sstaple AT liffe DoT com | ----- |
| -+-.| (if you can't figure it out...) | -+-.|
|洵洵洵洱 |洵洵洵洱
------- -------
John Francis
Simon 'tufty' Stapleton <nob...@no.bloody.where> wrote:
>Joyce Haslam <co...@argonet.co.uk> writes:
>
>> Hence (?) the belief in the south of England that the north begins at
>> Watford.
>
>Ever been to Watford? It's 'orrible. Quite enough to make you want
>to turn around and go back to London. Hence "It's grim oop north".
Funny - my wife alway says that Watford is the farthest *South* that
civilization reaches in the UK.
But then she's from Nottingham. We *met* in Watford, though. 25 years ago.
Branko Collin
wrote:
>>Den of Iniquity wrote:
>>[about his home town]
>>> I'm halfway down Lower Petergate before I realise I'm still
>>> clutching the People magazine...
>
>And, just as an interesting fact, the word "gate" has nothing
>whatsoever to do with the usual English noun "gate"; it's the
>Scandinavian word for "street". Street names ending in "gate" are
>common in northeast England - a memory of the Viking occupation
>(the Vikings made York their capital).
You just had to rub that in, didn't you? ;-)
(For the moment generalizing all Scandinavians to be descendants of
the Vikings.)
--
branko
-- ik maak alles stuk
Joseph Fatula
>
> In article <78no6n$o...@fido.engr.sgi.com>,
> John Francis <jfra...@dungeon.engr.sgi.com> wrote:
> [...]
> >>Ever been to Watford? It's 'orrible. Quite enough to make you want
> >>to turn around and go back to London. Hence "It's grim oop north".
> >
> >Funny - my wife alway says that Watford is the farthest *South* that
> >civilization reaches in the UK.
>
> Berwick-upon-Tweed. It's certainly not civilised where I am know (in
> Reading; though the existince of pheasants not far away is a good sign).
>
> I have a theory that civilisation is proportional to latitude. For
> example, Scotland, Canada, Japan, Sweden, and New Zealand. Perhaps it's
> the lower gravity.
I tend to think that anything east of Salisbury is a bit too rough for
me...
--
Flashlight: A case for holding dead batteries.
David Given
John Francis <jfra...@dungeon.engr.sgi.com> wrote:
[...]
>>Ever been to Watford? It's 'orrible. Quite enough to make you want
>>to turn around and go back to London. Hence "It's grim oop north".
>
>Funny - my wife alway says that Watford is the farthest *South* that
>civilization reaches in the UK.
Watford? Good grief. I never thought civilisation got as far as
Berwick-upon-Tweed. It's certainly not civilised where I am know (in
Reading; though the existince of pheasants not far away is a good sign).
I have a theory that civilisation is proportional to latitude. For
example, Scotland, Canada, Japan, Sweden, and New Zealand. Perhaps it's
the lower gravity.
--
+- David Given ---------------McQ-+ "Hydrogen fusion, the sun makes shine
| Work: d...@tao.co.uk | Vascular pressure makes the ivy twine.
| Play: dgi...@iname.com | Because of Rayleigh, the sky's so blue.
+- http://wired.st-and.ac.uk/~dg -+ Hormonal fixation is why I love you."
Dylan O'Donnell
> In article <78no6n$o...@fido.engr.sgi.com>,
> John Francis <jfra...@dungeon.engr.sgi.com> wrote:
> [...]
> >civilization reaches in the UK.
>
> Watford? Good grief. I never thought civilisation got as far as
> Berwick-upon-Tweed. It's certainly not civilised where I am know (in
> Reading; though the existince of pheasants not far away is a good sign).
>
> I have a theory that civilisation is proportional to latitude. For
> example, Scotland, Canada, Japan, Sweden, and New Zealand. Perhaps it's
> the lower gravity.
s/lower/higher/ ? Oblate spheroid, and all that...
--
: Dylan O'Donnell : "Are not gross Bodies and Light convertible :
: Demon Internet Ltd : into one another [...] ?" :
: Resident, Forgotten Office : -- Sir Isaac Newton, "Opticks", 1706 :
: http://www.fysh.org/~psmith/ : "E = mc^2" -- Albert Einstein, 1905 :
Erik Max Francis
> > I have a theory that civilisation is proportional to latitude. For
> > example, Scotland, Canada, Japan, Sweden, and New Zealand. Perhaps
> > it's
> > the lower gravity.
>
> s/lower/higher/ ? Oblate spheroid, and all that...
Well, there's two competing factors -- the equatorial bulge will contain
more mass, so if you're closer to it (e.g., nearer the equator), then
you'll feel more weight.
On the other hand, though, the Earth rotates as a rigid body rotating
with constant angular velocity, so the further you are from the axis
(e.g., again, closer to the equator), then there will be a greater
centrifugal pseudoforce (if you naively pretend that you live in an
inertial frame, which we all do), and so you will feel less weight.
I don't offhand know which effect is stronger, and don't have any
figures in front of me. (Also the Earth's interior is _not_ at all
uniform, so it really matters where you take your gravity measurements
from.)
--
Erik Max Francis / email m...@alcyone.com / whois mf303 / icq 16063900
Alcyone Systems / irc maxxon (efnet) / finger m...@finger.alcyone.com
San Jose, CA / languages En, Eo / web http://www.alcyone.com/max/
USA / icbm 37 20 07 N 121 53 38 W / &tSftDotIotE
\
/ In the fight between you and the world, back the world.
/ Frank Zappa
Andy Scarfe
>Joyce Haslam <co...@argonet.co.uk> writes:
>
>> Hence (?) the belief in the south of England that the north begins at
>> Watford.
>
>to turn around and go back to London. Hence "It's grim oop north".
>
I _have_ been to Watford. It _is_ 'orrible. It did make me turn round
and go back to Yorkshire. After all, Watford is considered a London
suburb these days, isn't it?
Andy
Andy Scarfe andy"bridgest.demon.co.uk
'Oh, don't try. Trying's the first step towards failure!"
Homer Simpson
Erik Max Francis
> I always thought that the Earth's centripetal acceleration was
> trivial.
> There's only one thing for it --- do the maths (I'm allowed to, it's
> after
> midnight).
Yes, it's on the order of 10^-3 gee. The question is whether or not the
oblateness effect is more or less significant. Both effects are
"trivial" if you're only talking one or two significant figures in the
first place.
David Given
Erik Max Francis <m...@alcyone.com> wrote:
[...]
>Well, there's two competing factors -- the equatorial bulge will contain
>more mass, so if you're closer to it (e.g., nearer the equator), then
>you'll feel more weight.
>I don't offhand know which effect is stronger, and don't have any
>figures in front of me. (Also the Earth's interior is _not_ at all
>uniform, so it really matters where you take your gravity measurements
>from.)
I always thought that the Earth's centripetal acceleration was trivial.
There's only one thing for it --- do the maths (I'm allowed to, it's after
midnight).
Centripetal acceleration = r[omega]^2
r = radius of Earth = erm. About 6e6 metres, I think.
omega = speed of rotation, in radians per second.
Right. The Earth rotates once every twenty-four hours, so that's
2*pi/86400 or 72.7e-6 radians/sec.
Therefore the centripetal acceleration is 6e6*72.7e-6*72.7e-6 = 0.032
ms^-2, and since 1g is 9.8ms^-2 that's 0.3% of a g. Not a lot.
Of course, I could be wrong (it is after midnight). Now all I need is the
polar radius of the Earth, and a slightly more accurate equatorial radius.
Is this on topic?
Andrew Plotkin
> I always thought that the Earth's centripetal acceleration was trivial.
> There's only one thing for it --- do the maths (I'm allowed to, it's after
> midnight).
> Centripetal acceleration = r[omega]^2
> r = radius of Earth = erm. About 6e6 metres, I think.
> omega = speed of rotation, in radians per second.
> Right. The Earth rotates once every twenty-four hours, so that's
> 2*pi/86400 or 72.7e-6 radians/sec.
> Therefore the centripetal acceleration is 6e6*72.7e-6*72.7e-6 = 0.032
> ms^-2, and since 1g is 9.8ms^-2 that's 0.3% of a g. Not a lot.
Half a pound, for me. You'd notice if it dropped into your hand.
> Of course, I could be wrong (it is after midnight). Now all I need is the
> polar radius of the Earth, and a slightly more accurate equatorial radius.
> Is this on topic?
"Small World".
Schep
>
> I always thought that the Earth's centripetal acceleration was trivial.
> There's only one thing for it --- do the maths (I'm allowed to, it's after
> midnight).
>
> Centripetal acceleration = r[omega]^2
> r = radius of Earth = erm. About 6e6 metres, I think.
> omega = speed of rotation, in radians per second.
>
> Right. The Earth rotates once every twenty-four hours, so that's
> 2*pi/86400 or 72.7e-6 radians/sec.
I'm sorry, pi is 3. Try again.
> Therefore the centripetal acceleration is 6e6*72.7e-6*72.7e-6 = 0.032
> ms^-2, and since 1g is 9.8ms^-2 that's 0.3% of a g. Not a lot.
>
> Of course, I could be wrong (it is after midnight). Now all I need is the
> polar radius of the Earth, and a slightly more accurate equatorial radius.
>
> Is this on topic?
What's a topic?
--
--Schep
Email address is scheplerAtpilotDotmsuDotedu.
Matthew T. Russotto
}
}> I always thought that the Earth's centripetal acceleration was
}> trivial.
}> There's only one thing for it --- do the maths (I'm allowed to, it's
}> after
}> midnight).
}
}oblateness effect is more or less significant. Both effects are
}"trivial" if you're only talking one or two significant figures in the
}first place.
I think you'll find earth's gravitational anomalies are greater than both.
--
Matthew T. Russotto russ...@pond.com
"Extremism in defense of liberty is no vice, and moderation in pursuit
of justice is no virtue."
Erik Max Francis
> I think you'll find earth's gravitational anomalies are greater than
> both.
Oh, I'm sure they are. I was considering averaged over the equator, and
averaged in a region around the poles (i.e., ignoring mass
concentrations).
After all, there _is_ a standard, constant acceleration due to gravity
which physicists use: 9.806 65 m/s^2. I can only assume that this is
arrived at by empirical means, since it has more accuracy than the
gravitational constant itself (which is [6.672 59 +- 0.000 85] x 10^-11
N m^2/kg^2). (Although I should point that the product of the
gravitational constant times the masses of bodies in the solar system is
known to much greater accuracy.)
--
Erik Max Francis / email m...@alcyone.com / whois mf303 / icq 16063900
Alcyone Systems / irc maxxon (efnet) / finger m...@finger.alcyone.com
San Jose, CA / languages En, Eo / web http://www.alcyone.com/max/
USA / icbm 37 20 07 N 121 53 38 W / &tSftDotIotE
\
/ Oh, what lies there are in kisses.
/ Heinrich Heine
Adam Cadre
> I never thought civilisation got as far as Berwick-upon-Tweed.
Hey, I think I saw that on Cinemax.
-----
Adam Cadre, Anaheim, CA
http://adamcadre.ac
J. Holder
> I have a theory that civilisation is proportional to latitude. For
> example, Scotland, Canada, Japan, Sweden, and New Zealand. Perhaps it's
> the lower gravity.
Has it occured to you that Japan streches through almost 30 degrees of
latitude? Tokyo is almost the same latitude as Los Angles, thereby blowing
your theory into little tiny bits. (I did not know this until I went
to Tokyo for most of last December...)
--
John Holder (jho...@frii.com) http://www.frii.com/~jholder/
Joyce Haslam
J. Holder <jho...@io.frii.com> wrote:
> David Given (dg@) wrote:
> > I have a theory that civilisation is proportional to latitude.
> > For example, Scotland, Canada, Japan, Sweden, and New Zealand.
> > Perhaps it's the lower gravity.
> Has it occured to you that Japan streches through almost 30 degrees
> of latitude?
I wonder if the racial uniformity on the Japanese islands has
produced a social uniformity; or if they are as diverse as the
British islands.
What do a Cornishman and a Yorkshireman agree on? Their contempt for
London.
If Scotland achieves home rule, the Orkneys and Shetlands will refuse
to have any part of it.
> Tokyo is almost the same latitude as Los Angles, thereby blowing
> your theory into little tiny bits.
According to the great British press, LA is what Tokyo would be if
only it had lebensraum. If the papers are correct (and other such
miracles come to pass) the theory is buttressed not blown to bits.
> (I did not know this until I went to Tokyo for most of last
> December...)
What exactly did you learn in Tokyo? :-)
Is it not like LA?
Joyce.
--
Joyce Haslam Lancashire, England
This sig file does not conform to the DM
Neil K.
> According to the great British press, LA is what Tokyo would be if
That wins the award for the most daft argument I've heard all day.
Admittedly, it's only lunchtime...
- Neil K.
--
t e l a computer consulting + design * Vancouver, BC, Canada
web: http://www.tela.bc.ca/tela/ * email: tela @ tela.bc.ca
Matthew T. Russotto
}
}> I think you'll find earth's gravitational anomalies are greater than
}> both.
}
}Oh, I'm sure they are. I was considering averaged over the equator, and
}averaged in a region around the poles (i.e., ignoring mass
}concentrations).
}
}After all, there _is_ a standard, constant acceleration due to gravity
}which physicists use: 9.806 65 m/s^2.
Probably the acceleration due to gravity at mean sea level, which is
constant.
Erik Max Francis
> Probably the acceleration due to gravity at mean sea level, which is
> constant.
Given a radially symmetric Earth.
--
Erik Max Francis / email m...@alcyone.com / whois mf303 / icq 16063900
Alcyone Systems / irc maxxon (efnet) / finger m...@finger.alcyone.com
San Jose, CA / languages En, Eo / web http://www.alcyone.com/max/
USA / icbm 37 20 07 N 121 53 38 W / &tSftDotIotE
\
/ Whom God has put asunder, why should man put together?
/ Ralph Waldo Emerson
Matthew T. Russotto
}
}> Probably the acceleration due to gravity at mean sea level, which is
}> constant.
}
}Given a radially symmetric Earth.
Not even that is necessary. The mean sea level is a surface of constant
gravitational potential. And in fact, the earth's gravitational field isn't
radially symmetric.
TenthStone
(GMT):
>In article <2aQs2.114$phj.17...@news.frii.net>,
> J. Holder <jho...@io.frii.com> wrote:
>> David Given (dg@) wrote:
>> > I have a theory that civilisation is proportional to latitude.
>> > For example, Scotland, Canada, Japan, Sweden, and New Zealand.
The Yugoslav republics, Siberia, and the United States (all included for
different reasons). Maybe what you really mean is historical freedom
from conquerors.
>> > Perhaps it's the lower gravity.
>> Has it occured to you that Japan streches through almost 30 degrees
>> of latitude?
>
>I wonder if the racial uniformity on the Japanese islands has
>produced a social uniformity; or if they are as diverse as the
>British islands.
Japan isn't exactly socially convergent, but except for the outer regions
(Hokkaido and Ryukyu (Okinawa)) it's probably more so than any comparable
space on Earth.
>If Scotland achieves home rule, the Orkneys and Shetlands will refuse
>to have any part of it.
Which is one reason why violent revolutions against foreign powers so
rarely succeed.
>> Tokyo is almost the same latitude as Los Angles [sic], thereby blowing
>> your theory into little tiny bits.
Of course, that latitude also runs near Gibraltar, is actually north of
Mount Everest, and also passes through Virginia Beach, Virginia (my
current location), thereby blowing into little tiny bits any theory that
latitude is any more than the most imprecise predictor of climate.
>According to the great British press, LA is what Tokyo would be if
>only it had lebensraum. If the papers are correct (and other such
>miracles come to pass) the theory is buttressed not blown to bits.
Tokyo is slowly conquering the entire central breadth of Honshu. I
don't know what exactly you mean that it has no lebensraum (space
for economic/residential expansion). Of course, nothing is quite like
Los Angeles.
-----------
The imperturbable TenthStone
tenth...@hotmail.com mcc...@erols.com mcc...@gsgis.k12.va.us
Erik Max Francis
> Not even that is necessary. The mean sea level is a surface of
> constant
> gravitational potential.
You sure about that?
> And in fact, the earth's gravitational field isn't
> radially symmetric.
Naturally. That was my point.
Andrew Plotkin
> "Matthew T. Russotto" wrote:
> > Not even that is necessary. The mean sea level is a surface of
> > constant
> > gravitational potential.
> You sure about that?
He left out centrifugal effect, but is there anything else?
Ok, damping by friction and those damn continents sticking up in the way.
Erik Max Francis
> > > Not even that is necessary. The mean sea level is a surface of
> > > constant
> > > gravitational potential.
>
> > You sure about that?
>
> He left out centrifugal effect, but is there anything else?
He said that mean sea level is equipotential gravitational field
surfaces. I was questioning whether that is the case -- after all, mean
sea level could merely mean surfaces of constant radius.
> Ok, damping by friction and those damn continents sticking up in the
> way.
There's mass concentrations. Equipotential surfaces will not be
spheres, or even ellipsoids, though they'll be close.
Erik Max Francis
> Depends on the context; there's more than one definition of it.
> Turns
> out the number for 'g' is exact, BTW -- it's just a standard, not a
> measured value at MSL or anywhere else.
Very true, I'm the one who quoted its value (and it didn't have an error
bar). But what I was saying was that the standard value is based on an
empirical result at least _somewhere_ along the line.
Joyce Haslam
TenthStone <mcc...@erols.com> wrote:
> >According to the great British press, LA is what Tokyo would be if
> >only it had lebensraum. If the papers are correct (and other such
> >miracles come to pass) the theory is buttressed not blown to bits.
> Tokyo is slowly conquering the entire central breadth of Honshu. I
> don't know what exactly you mean that it has no lebensraum (space
> for economic/residential expansion).
I understand that Tokyo has far fewer golf clubs, back-yard swimming
pools, front-yard wide open spaces, four-bed four-bath ranch-style
bungalows than LA. Maybe I should just say it has a higher population
density. Hey I'm only chasing a demographic theory, not doing higher
algebra :-)
> Of course, nothing is quite like Los Angeles.
Amen.
Matthew T. Russotto
}
}> Not even that is necessary. The mean sea level is a surface of
}> constant gravitational potential.
}
}You sure about that?
Depends on the context; there's more than one definition of it. Turns
out the number for 'g' is exact, BTW -- it's just a standard, not a
measured value at MSL or anywhere else.
J. Holder
> In article <2aQs2.114$phj.17...@news.frii.net>,
> > Has it occured to you that Japan streches through almost 30 degrees
> > of latitude?
> I wonder if the racial uniformity on the Japanese islands has
> produced a social uniformity; or if they are as diverse as the
> British islands.
Pretty uniform - despite being spread out across such a distance, the
entire country has a land area about the size of the U.S. state of
Montana. And 4/5ths of Japan is too mountainous to be habitable, so
the majority of the ~150 million people in Japan live in an area 1/5 of
the size of Montana. 37 million of them live in the greater Tokyo area.
Yes, there is a high population density there - the guide book I read
said the habitable parts of Japan average ~6000 people per square
kilometer. (Higher in Tokyo...)
> > (I did not know this until I went to Tokyo for most of last
> > December...)
> What exactly did you learn in Tokyo? :-)
> Is it not like LA?
Well the 37 subways lines make it very unlike L.A. - you can get anywhere
you want to go without a car. And the people are nicer, more polite, and
better dressed. In my suit, I felt like a slob. They really dress sharply,
even just to go to the store. And the food is incredible. (Provided you
like seafood. I love sushi, and went out to the conveyer-belt sushi
places repeatedly...cheap and plentiful!) It is an incredibly safe city,
as well, providing a very un-LA feeling. As a foriegner, I felt completely
safe wandering around the back alleys of Tokyo in the middle of downtown
in the middle of the night, carrying wads of of yen. Very cash-based.
Anyway, I could go on in great detail, and ramble away...
I also learn a few important phrases...
"Ohayo gozaimasu. Ogenki desu ka?" (Hi, how are you?)
"Watakshi wa John desu." (I am John.)
"Namae biru, kudasai!" (I'd like a draft beer please!)
What more could anyone need to say? Oh, except perhaps:
"Hoto-dogu ju-ko, onegashi masu!" (I'd like 10 hot dogs, please!)
(One of my friends I travelled with insiisted on learning this phrase,
so when his father asked him if he learned any Japanese, he could whip
out this one...)
Magnus Olsson
Erik Max Francis <m...@alcyone.com> wrote:
>"Matthew T. Russotto" wrote:
>
>> Not even that is necessary. The mean sea level is a surface of
>> constant
>> gravitational potential.
>
>You sure about that?
Depends on what you mean with "mean sea level", of course, but the usual
definition of "mean sea level" is what is more precisely known as the
geoid: a potential surface of the gravitational field.
--
Magnus Olsson (m...@df.lth.se, zeb...@pobox.com)
------ http://www.pobox.com/~zebulon ------
Joyce Haslam
J. Holder <jho...@io.frii.com> wrote:
> > What exactly did you learn in Tokyo? :-)
> > Is it not like LA?
> Well the 37 subways lines make it very unlike L.A. - you can get
> anywhere you want to go without a car. And the people are nicer,
> more polite, and better dressed. In my suit, I felt like a slob.
> They really dress sharply, even just to go to the store. And the
> food is incredible. (Provided you like seafood. I love sushi, and
> went out to the conveyer-belt sushi places repeatedly...cheap and
> plentiful!) It is an incredibly safe city, as well, providing a
> very un-LA feeling. As a foriegner, I felt completely safe
> wandering around the back alleys of Tokyo in the middle of downtown
> in the middle of the night, carrying wads of of yen. Very
> cash-based. Anyway, I could go on in great detail, and ramble
> away...
That's very interesting; I wish you would go on.
I withdraw my remarks about Tokyo; it obviously is not like LA. In
fact, I've never before heard of a city where a foreigner could walk
about the city centre with wads of money at night in safety.
Neil K.
> I withdraw my remarks about Tokyo; it obviously is not like LA. In
> fact, I've never before heard of a city where a foreigner could walk
> about the city centre with wads of money at night in safety.
When I was there I remember seeing some people had small tanks containing
incredibly valuable prize-winning koi (carp) on their front doorsteps,
presumably for lack of room elsewhere in the house.
J. Holder
These stories reveal the most about how different it is to me:
My friends and I went out to a traditional Japanese restaurant - one
where you take off your shoes and sit cross-legged on tatami mats - for
a bento lunch. (Bento means lunchbox, although they are usually pretty
laquered boxes with compartments in which are rice, assorted smoked and
raw fish, types of seaweed and other things that I ate but have no clue
what they were.) It was a rainy day, so we had all brought our umbrellas,
just in case it should start raining again. After lunch, we got up and left.
About 2 blocks down the street, my friend realized he had left his umbrella
in the shop. He turns around to go get it, and almost runs into a lady
from the restaurant, who has run down the street to give him his umbrella.
Handing him the umbrella, she apologizes to us and says thank you repeatedly.
(I only know this because my friend is fluent in Japanese).
Later in the trip, we went to Akihabara, the electronics district. My
friend needed to buy a new hard disk. We picked up a 2 gig external SCSI
drive, and got distracted playing some games in the store. An hour and many
stores later, we realized that we had left his hard drive in LLaox (the store)
while playing the games, just sitting on the floor. Llaox is a very busy
place - eight stories jam-packed with people browsing the computer wares.
(There are four other Llaox stores in the area, one devoted to appliances,
one to stereos, one to musical instuments, etc.) We went back and the disk was
gone. So we go to the lost and found. Sure enough, someone has turned it
in, and we still have a hard disk.
Call me cynical, but in the U.S., there ain't no way either of those
events would have happened. I have a very favourable impression of Tokyo
from the three weeks I was there.
John
Irene Callaci
wrote:
Well, ok, I have to tell my story because, even now, I can't
believe this happened:
I live near Los Angeles. One morning on the way to work, I
stopped at a donut shop for coffee and a donut. I grabbed a
couple of dollars out of my purse but left my purse in my car
and left my car unlocked. I didn't notice that my purse was
missing until I got to work.
Upset at myself, and thinking that maybe the thief had simply
taken the money and thrown the purse in the trash, I went back
to the scene of the crime. Bad mistake. I was looking in some
trashcans in the alley behind the donut shop when three rough-
looking (to say the least) men wanted to know what I was doing
there. My heart started to pound and I thought to myself that
this was the stupidest idea I had ever had.
I explained that someone had stolen my purse but that I didn't
care about the money as much as I did about my daughter's
pictures or the hassle of replacing my driver's license and
credit cards. I told the men that I thought the thief might
have thrown the purse away after removing the money from it.
One of the men went away and came back with my purse, which
of course was empty. I thanked him and left, feeling myself
lucky to escape.
That night, I received a telephone call, saying that if I wanted
the contents of my purse back, I would need to pay some money.
"Oh, great," I thought. "These guys know where I live!" My heart
was pounding as I told the caller that I had already cancelled my
credit cards and replaced my driver's license. I said the only
thing I really wanted back were my daughter's pictures, but I
couldn't possibly pay money for them, since they weren't worth
anything to anyone except me.
Three days later, believe it or not, I received a package in
the mail. Inside were the contents of my purse (minus the money,
which was only about $3). My credit cards, my driver's license,
my daughter's pictures...everything was there. The thief (or
thieves) had even paid the postage!
Amazing. I still smile when I think about it.
irene
Andrew Plotkin
> Three days later, believe it or not, I received a package in
> the mail. Inside were the contents of my purse (minus the money,
> which was only about $3). My credit cards, my driver's license,
> my daughter's pictures...everything was there. The thief (or
> thieves) had even paid the postage!
ObSF: In Larry Niven's future history, people in Los Angeles carry wallets
with their address and a stamp on it. That way, a pickpocket just has to
drop it in the mailbox after he extracts all the money.
LucFrench
>
>> Three days later, believe it or not, I received a package in
>> the mail. Inside were the contents of my purse (minus the money,
>> which was only about $3). My credit cards, my driver's license,
>> my daughter's pictures...everything was there. The thief (or
>> thieves) had even paid the postage!
>
>ObSF: In Larry Niven's future history, people in Los Angeles carry wallets
>with their address and a stamp on it. That way, a pickpocket just has to
>drop it in the mailbox after he extracts all the money.
>
>--Z
Pedantic Note: I believe the implication that this was standard throughout all
of Earth.
(Although not the Asteriod Belt.)
Thanks
Luc "Uranium and Vitamin Pills make a potent mix." French
Erik Max Francis
> Three days later, believe it or not, I received a package in
> the mail. Inside were the contents of my purse (minus the money,
> which was only about $3). My credit cards, my driver's license,
> my daughter's pictures...everything was there. The thief (or
> thieves) had even paid the postage!
>
> Amazing. I still smile when I think about it.
Wow. Sounds like you encountered the biggest, bumbling, idiot thieves
in the United States.
--
Erik Max Francis / email m...@alcyone.com / whois mf303 / icq 16063900
Alcyone Systems / irc maxxon (efnet) / finger m...@finger.alcyone.com
San Jose, CA / languages En, Eo / web http://www.alcyone.com/max/
USA / icbm 37 20 07 N 121 53 38 W / &tSftDotIotE
\
/ Nationalism is an infantile sickness.
/ Albert Einstein
Mary K. Kuhner
J. Holder <jho...@io.frii.com> wrote:
>Call me cynical, but in the U.S., there ain't no way either of those
>events would have happened. I have a very favourable impression of Tokyo
>from the three weeks I was there.
A bit cynical, maybe.
I was in New York City for a scientific conference, living at the
YMCA because I couldn't afford the conference hotel, and walking
ten blocks across Manhatten each night to get back to the Y. One
night I stopped to eat in a little diner between two X-rated
movie theaters. After I left I walked about six blocks before I
realized I'd forgotten my backpack--containing my plane tickets
and $100 in cash, all I had. I ran back to the diner in a panic.
There were a couple of big, burly, biker-looking fellows sitting
at my table. I asked the waiter about my pack: he just shrugged.
Then one of the big guys beckoned me over. I went, very nervously.
He grinned and said "I bet I know what you're looking for, little
lady" and produced my backpack. Everything was still in it. I
thanked him most profusely and went my way....
I wouldn't want to count on this happening in NYC: then again, I'm
not sure I would count on it in Tokyo either.
Mary Kuhner mkku...@genetics.washington.edu
Joe Mason
>
>> Three days later, believe it or not, I received a package in
>> the mail. Inside were the contents of my purse (minus the money,
>> which was only about $3). My credit cards, my driver's license,
>> my daughter's pictures...everything was there. The thief (or
>> thieves) had even paid the postage!
>>
>> Amazing. I still smile when I think about it.
Wow. What nice people. I am very impressed by their kindness and
generosity. I would be MORE impressed if they had NOT stolen your
purse, but we can't have everything now, can we?
Joe
--
Congratulations, Canada, on preserving your national igloo.
-- Mike Huckabee, Governor of Arkansas
Irene Callaci
>Erik Max Francis <m...@alcyone.com> wrote:
>>Irene Callaci wrote:
>>
>>> Three days later, believe it or not, I received a package in
>>> the mail. Inside were the contents of my purse (minus the money,
>>> which was only about $3). My credit cards, my driver's license,
>>> my daughter's pictures...everything was there. The thief (or
>>> thieves) had even paid the postage!
>>>
>>> Amazing. I still smile when I think about it.
>
>Wow. What nice people. I am very impressed by their kindness and
>generosity. I would be MORE impressed if they had NOT stolen your
>purse, but we can't have everything now, can we?
I still don't know what to think of this incident. These guys were
*not* nice, in the usual sense of the word. I was terrified. But I
did come away with a sense of...oh, I don't know...a sense that
everyone has another side to them, if you can just reach it. That
sounds corny and gullible (and I certainly would *never* rely on
it being true, especially in a life-threatening situation), but this
experience really changed the way I look at people.
irene
David Given
[...]
>There's no comparison. Something about the public culture here is such that
>people simply do not do the kinds of things to each other that happen without
>a second thought at home. There are things I don't like here, but the amount
>of consideration and kindness you get from strangers isn't one of them.
[...]
I think it's politeness. If you're in a culture that sets store by being
polite, then people tend to be nice to you. If you're not, they don't.
I always try to be polite to people I meet casually. Why not? It gives a
better impression. It can make the day of the recipient marginally nicer.
It can make people be marginally nicer to you. There's very little effort
involved.
In all your various countries, do people say thank-you to bus drivers as
you get off?
--
+- David Given ---------------McQ-+
| Work: d...@tao.co.uk | Smile! The Illuminati are watching.
| Play: dgi...@iname.com |
+- http://wired.st-and.ac.uk/~dg -+
Magnus Olsson
David Given <dg@> wrote:
>In article <79eb96$b20$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>, <john_...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>[...]
>>There's no comparison. Something about the public culture here is such that
>>people simply do not do the kinds of things to each other that happen without
>>a second thought at home. There are things I don't like here, but the amount
>>of consideration and kindness you get from strangers isn't one of them.
>[...]
>
>I think it's politeness. If you're in a culture that sets store by being
>polite, then people tend to be nice to you. If you're not, they don't.
Politeness is a rather formal thing, however. I read an article by a
Swedish journalist who's spent rather a lot of time in Japan, where he
claims that the flip side of the Japanese politeness is that Japanese
people can be rather inconsiderate, even rude, in situations where
they are not required to be polite - with strangers on a train, for
example.
I don't know if this is true or not.
But I can anyway easily imagine a society that would work that way, and
where, for example, stealing a purse a stranger had left behind wouldn't
count as impolite.
>In all your various countries, do people say thank-you to bus drivers as
>you get off?
It's very unusual in Sweden, though I think bus drivers (as opposed to
passengers) here have become more polite during the last ten years or
so - probably the result of conscious "service with a smile"
campaigns.
Den of Iniquity
wrote:
> In all your various countries, do people say thank-you to bus drivers
> as you get off?
It varies from place to place. Especially if your country is composed of
dozens of states, no doubt. In the North of England, I've found that it is
often the case. I do.
--
Den
Paul O'Brian
> Also: Adam, congratulations on the offer re: your book.
What? Did I miss something? Did Adam's novel get bought? By whom?
I am clearly lacking in information here.
Paul O'Brian
obr...@colorado.edu
http://ucsu.colorado.edu/~obrian
Adam Cadre
> What? Did I miss something? Did Adam's novel get bought? By whom?
I'll post an announcement here when the book actually is available for
purchase. Till then, you can get updates on its progress by visiting
the Writing section of my web site.
But, yeah, the short of it is that the book has sold in North America
and Europe, and for enough money that I'll probably never have to
work again.
-----
Adam Cadre, Anaheim, CA
http://adamcadre.ac
Mary K. Kuhner
David Given <dg@> wrote:
>In all your various countries, do people say thank-you to bus drivers as
>you get off?
About one person in three here in Seattle, WA, USA, except during peak
hours when there's no time to do so. More common on commute routes
where you see the same driver every day.
A friend of mine took the wrong bus from the airport (both northbound
and southbound stop at the same place going in the same direction)
and ended up in a remote southern suburb in the middle of the night.
The bus driver, on discovering what had happened, drove him all the
way back downtown.
Mary Kuhner mkku...@genetics.washington.edu
Magnus Olsson
>But, yeah, the short of it is that the book has sold in North America
>and Europe,
Wow! Congratulations!
>and for enough money that I'll probably never have to
>work again.
I take it you don't count writing as "working"? Or do you intend to
retire and live off the interest off your advance for the rest of your
life? :-) (In the latter case, you must have one heck of an agent).
okbl...@usa.net
dg@ (David Given) wrote:
>
> In all your various countries, do people say thank-you to bus drivers as
> you get off?
>
What is this thing called "buses"?
[ok, from L.A.]
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
Lelah Conrad
>Also: Adam, congratulations on the offer re: your book. I had the pleasure
>of meeting you in Oregon last year (hi Saudade) and I'm glad you're one of
>the very few people who get the chance to do work that they care about and
>find fulfilling. Good luck.
>
>John Gregg
>Osaka, Japan
Mus! You're still out there! Hi! Isn't it great that we got to eat
cheap veggie food at the Glenwood with Adam
wait-till-you-see-the-move-rights-offer Cadre before he becomes a
mega-star?
Saudade ;)
Den of Iniquity
> dg@ (David Given) wrote:
>> In all your various countries, do people say thank-you to bus drivers
>> as you get off?
>
>What is this thing called "buses"?
A new kind of weird i-f. As in "Buses of the Z-machine".
--
Den
Darin Johnson
> What is this thing called "buses"?
>
> [ok, from L.A.]
Hmm, how about an IF game where you live in LA, your car has broken
down, and you have only 8 hours to get to an important meeting?
(my biggest gripe with mass transit is that it never went where I
wanted to go, or you had to make lots of connections, the times were
infrequent, etc)
--
Darin Johnson
Laziness is the father of invention
Jonadab the Unsightly One
> What is this thing called "buses"?
It's like a jeepnee, but enclosed, less crowded, and faster.
- jonadab
Jonadab the Unsightly One
> But, yeah, the short of it is that the book has sold in North America
> and Europe, and for enough money that I'll probably never have to
> work again.
So, you'll have a lot of time for writing IF in the future?
- jonadab
Jonadab the Unsightly One
> People do not help us only because we are foreigners. Bicycles are parked,
> unlocked, on street corners, outside apartment buildings, at train stations.
> Babies are left in their carriages while the parent goes inside to do some
> grocery shopping.
I can see those things happening here. Well, not the train stations,
because we don't have passenger trains. But the rest of it.
But this is a much smaller city than Tokyo. I _can't_ see those
things happening in Mansfield, let alone Cleveland, much less
Chicago.
> And every time I see a beer vending machine I'm reminded
> how if you stuck one on a street in Alabama (where I am from), a bunch of
> assholes in a pickup would come by and haul it off in about two minutes.
Heh.
> > >Call me cynical, but in the U.S., there ain't no way either of those
> > >events would have happened.
Depends where in the U.S.
<rant intensity=70%>
In smaller communities there is still a
certain amount of trust. It's limited, sure.
You can't trust _everyone_. You can't leave
something valuable sitting in an obscure,
hidden place and expect to come back two days
later and find it. But you can trust the
public. You can leave something valuable
sitting in plain sight in a public place and
reasonably expect it to still be there when you
come back for it. We never lock our cars at home
and seldom anywhere else in town. (In Ontario
(the suburb of Mansfield, not the province of
Canada) 20 minutes away we have to lock them, but
that's different. It's a larger city, and it's
right next to Mansfield, which has a fairly bad
crime rate (for Ohio).) We don't lock the house
either. Well, dad locks it at night if he's still
awake after the last person comes home, but he grew
up in Akron. The rest of us don't bother. (Of
course, we have a doggie...) I walk alone anywhere
in town that I want, any time of day I want. (I used
to walk to work at 4am. I've been known to walk the
dog or go stargazing in the park at 3am. Now I walk
home from work at 3am. No, you don't see anyone else
when you're out at those hours. But I feel safe anyway.
</rant>
However, kindness and consideration are not the cause of this
security.
Anyway, I've developed a personal philosophy on this issue.
I'd rather be robbed or somesuch once every couple of decades
than spend my life paranoid. Or, put another way, the practical
freedoms I gain by being "too" trusting are much more significant
than the risks to which I subject myself.
- jonadab
Jonadab the Unsightly One
> In all your various countries, do people say thank-you to bus drivers as
> you get off?
When the bus is arriving at school in the morning, no. When it's
dropping them off at home in the afternoon, some of them do, but
certainly not all.
(Around here, in any case where a bus is used for anything other than
school transportation, the bus driver is usually a part of the group
and gets off with everybody else. Commercial busses don't visit
Galion. I've ridden a charter bus a _couple_ of times (and yes, we
thanked the driver when we got off), but nowhere near here (I was
travelling elsewhere). I've only ever seen a non-charter commercial
bus in Chicago, which is a COMPLETELY different culture from here.)
- jonadab
okbl...@usa.net
jon...@zerospam.com (Jonadab the Unsightly One) wrote:
> john_...@hotmail.com wrote:
>
>
> > > >Call me cynical, but in the U.S., there ain't no way either of those
> > > >events would have happened.
>
> Depends where in the U.S.
>
> <rant intensity=70%>
>
> In smaller communities there is still a
> certain amount of trust. It's limited, sure.
Have I mentioned I live in Los Angeles?
In my more absent-minded moments, I have left the doors to my various
apartments and/or houses wide open, gone away for several hours (and I think
once for a day or two), and come back to find absolutely nothing horrible had
happened. Or nothing at all, actually.
The moral is probably that I should be paying more attention when I leave the
house.
But you could add something in there about things not being as horrible,
crime-wise, as they are made out to be, even in the big, bad urban jungle.
[ok]
Avrom Faderman
okbl...@usa.net wrote in message <79nspv$rpu$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>...
>In article <36beaeb6...@news.bright.net>,
> jon...@zerospam.com (Jonadab the Unsightly One) wrote:
>> john_...@hotmail.com wrote:
>>
>>
>> > > >Call me cynical, but in the U.S., there ain't no way either of those
>> > > >events would have happened.
>>
>> Depends where in the U.S.
>>
>> <rant intensity=70%>
>>
>> In smaller communities there is still a
>> certain amount of trust. It's limited, sure.
>
>Have I mentioned I live in Los Angeles?
[Left open doors, all OK].
In San Francisco (smaller than LA or Tokyo, but *way* bigger than Ontario,
OH), restaurant people have run after me with umbrellas and even a briefcase
(just like in the original story).
Here in Rochester, NY (smaller than San Francisco, much smaller than LA or
Tokyo, but still hardly a small town), I've seen a bus driver (hardly a
profession known for random acts of kindness) give a person who had been
waiting at the wrong bus stop a free ride to the right one.
Of course, someone kept breaking into my car here until I just started
leaving it unlocked, and when I lived in LA, I was robbed at gunpoint once.
I think the moral of the story is that some people are nice, some people are
crappy, and location has relatively little to do with it.
Avrom
Adam Cadre
> My biggest gripe with mass transit is that they want billions from
> my neighbors and myself for a system that was never intended to serve
> us, and never will.
Assuming you're not being sarcastic -- we already have enough problems
with people thinking a lot about themselves and not much about the
society in which we live. Mass transit in Southern California, at
least at present, is intended for people who need to get from place
to place but can't afford cars. I took the bus for several years, and
I always knew when strawberries were in season from how crowded the
bus was, since the only people who made use of it other than me were
local migrant workers. Now, if we allow people to "opt out" of
paying for mass transit if they don't use it, we're left in the
ridiculous position of asking people who can't afford automobiles to
pay for an entire bus system. Feh. Members of our society need mass
transit, so we as a society need to provide it for them. This means
everyone.
Neil K.
> Yes indeed. My biggest gripe with mass transit is that they want billions
> from my neighbors and myself for a system that was never intended to serve
> us, and never will.
Yeah, the nerve of those selfish jerks! I mean, next they're gonna want
to extract billions from your pocket to pay for fire stations in other
communities, for patching potholes in streets in crummy neighbourhoods
that you'll never drive on, for schools even if you have no kids, for
police and garbage collection (hell - is there a difference?) in other
parts of town. What a bunch of commies! Next it's gonna be like Canada,
where you have to pay taxes to run hospitals in towns you'll never visit.
Fight now before it's too late!
- Neil K.
--
t e l a computer consulting + design * Vancouver, BC, Canada
web: http://www.tela.bc.ca/tela/ * email: tela @ tela.bc.ca
okbl...@usa.net
Darin Johnson <da...@usa.net.NOSPAM> wrote:
>
> Hmm, how about an IF game where you live in LA, your car has broken
> down, and you have only 8 hours to get to an important meeting?
All right.
In: Your Home In Northridge
> CALL CAB
Six hours later, the cab arrives. When you get into the back, you notice that
the meter is already reading $4,924.36.
> CABBIE, GO TO MEETING
You give the cabbie your instructions and he just laughs. "Are you joking,
Mac? You expect to get to the South Bay from here--at 5PM on a Friday night?
We gotta go through the pass, get by LAX...."
> CABBIE, GO!
Six hours later, you arrive.
***YOU HAVE LOST***
Let's try that again...
In: Your Home In Northridge
> GET BUS SCHEDULE
Where?
> CALL RTD
You don't know the number.
> LOOK UP RTD IN PHONE BOOK
You look in the phone book. Hmm. Nothing under "RTD".
> LOOK UP SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA RAPID TRANSIT DISTRICT
Ah, there it is. The number is 555-1212.
> DIAL 555-1212
A voice says, "At the tone, the time will be...11 AM...and 30
seconds...<beep>" (Must be the wrong number.)
> DIAL 411
You dial 411. An operator answers, "What city please?"
> OPERATOR, I DON'T KNOW
You stammer, "Uh...I don't know...I'm trying to find the number of..."
The operator interrupts you: "What city please?"
> OPERATOR, SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA RAPID TRANSIT DISTRICT
You say, "I'm looking for the number for..."
The operator interrupts you: "What city please?"
> OPERATOR, LOS ANGELES
You say, "Los Angeles."
The operator says, "Go ahead".
> OPERATOR, THE BUS
You say, "I need the number for the bus."
The operator says, "Thank you."
A mechanical voice intones, "Thank you for calling. The number is
(323)555-1234. Once again: (323)555-1234."
<click>
> DIAL 555-1234
A man's voice answers, "Greyhound bus terminal."
> THROW PHONE
You throw the phone against the stucco wall, which fractures. You see a
pamphlette fall to the floor.
> X PAMPHLETTE
It's a bus schedule! You recall now that last year, when you put your fist
through the wall, you covered it up with stolen bus schedules which you
painted white and taped over the hole. But the inside of the schedule is
still legible!
> STUDY PAMPHLETTE
An hour later, you've figured it out: If you take the 114 from Northridge to
Burbank, the 57 from Burbank to downtown, 68A from downtown to the
Mid-Wilshire district, 68B from Mid-Wilshire to the westside, the LAX express
(which only stops 14 times) to the airport, and the shuttle from the airport
to the South Bay, you can get to the meeting! Maybe even in the 5 1/2 hours
you have remaining!
> TAKE 114
I see no 114 here.
> GO TO BUS STOP
A half-an-hour later, you've walked to the nearest bus stop.
You're at the bus stop. An unpleasant looking bench here serves as an
advertisement for a real estate agent and a rap artist who looks like he could
kill the real estate agent with a sheet of 30lb paper.
A hispanic house maid walks by.
A bus passes you.
> Z
You wait 15 minutes.
> Z
You wait another 15 minutes.
A bus passes you.
> BUS DRIVER, WAIT!!!
You call out to the bus driver but, of course, he can't hear you.
> LOOK
You don't see anything special.
> LOOK
A bus is coming.
> JUMP OUT IN FRONT OF BUS
The next thing you know, you're flat on your back. An irritated bus driver is
looking down at you: "Geez, buddy. Why didn't you just sit on the bench like
everyone else?"
> BUS DRIVER, CALL 911
Your voice isn't working very well.
> DIAL 911
You take out your cell phone but the bus driver stops you.
"I'm way ahead of you, mac. An ambulance is on the way."
An ambulance screeches to a halt. The paramedics jump out.
"This man has a thrombosis of the ulterior motive. We need to get him to South
Bay Hospital immediately! Call the helicopter."
"What a break!" you think. You'll be in South Bay in no time. All you have to
do is sneak out of the hospital to your meeting.
Then you lose consciousness.
[etc.]
> (my biggest gripe with mass transit is that it never went where I
> wanted to go, or you had to make lots of connections, the times were
> infrequent, etc)
Yes indeed. My biggest gripe with mass transit is that they want billions
from my neighbors and myself for a system that was never intended to serve
us, and never will.
[ok]
Joe Mason
Until he moved in with us, one of my roommates had never lived in a house
with a lock. We had a hell of a time persuading him to take his keys with
him when he went to school. Eventually we gave up and stopped locking the
house.
(That has changed now that I got more copies of the keys made, so don't get
any ideas.)
Jon Petersen
>
> Yes indeed. My biggest gripe with mass transit is that they want billions
> from my neighbors and myself for a system that was never intended to serve
> us, and never will.
Rather than jumping wholeheartedly to "club the classist," I'll suggest
that in LA gripes with the MTA are understandable, considering that they
are, basically, a bunch of money-grubbing fuck-ups. Sheesh, how much
money was dumped into a subway project that produced, what, like TEN
MILES of track. (I think the cost worked out to $140 million per mile
or so.) This goes a long way towards explaining why there's a lot of
(perfectly justified IMHO) resentment floating around. That's no reason
to hate the bus system, of course, but the fact is a lot of the problems
with the buses were due to funds that should have gone to them being
diverted to the subway system. Things are improving, though.
Oh yeah, to put in my $.02 on the old Los Angeles-Tokyo "latitude =
civilization" thread, I'd like to argue that Los Angeles pretty much IS
the center of the civilized world. <Runs away.>
Jon
Darin Johnson
> Yes indeed. My biggest gripe with mass transit is that they want billions
> from my neighbors and myself for a system that was never intended to serve
> us, and never will.
The irony is that they keep trying to convince everyone to use mass
transit, then don't make it available to use. I used to feel real
guilty in grad school since I lived one mile away and drove - but the
last bus usually came at a mere 11pm, only one one per hour, and worse
on weekends, and walking home at 2am meant you tripped on things in
the dark a lot. (but it was very convenient as an undergrad)
The commuter train was odd, because I tried to take it downtown for
jury duty - and downtown is traditionally where mass transit is
designed to take people - but there were no parking lots near the
train stops for me to use (which I didn't find out about in advance).
Turns out the closest train stop was also the spot where a lot of
people worked, so it was designed assuming few locals would be using
it (there were drop off curbs, perhaps they assumed everyone had
spouses?). I *tried* to be a good little citizen when commuting
downtown for jury duty, but over half the time I ended up driving
the whole way.
--
Darin Johnson
I'm not a well adjusted person, but I play one on the net.
David Given
[...]
>Oh yeah, to put in my $.02 on the old Los Angeles-Tokyo "latitude =
>civilization" thread, I'd like to argue that Los Angeles pretty much IS
>the center of the civilized world. <Runs away.>
Very hot, very dense, no room to move, and you die very quickly if you
don't have the necessary protection?
--
+- David Given ---------------McQ-+
| Work: d...@tao.co.uk | Truth is stranger than fiction, because
| Play: dgi...@iname.com | fiction has to make sense.
+- http://wired.st-and.ac.uk/~dg -+
Matthew T. Russotto
Darin Johnson <da...@usa.net.NOSPAM> wrote:
}okbl...@usa.net writes:
}
}> Yes indeed. My biggest gripe with mass transit is that they want billions
}> from my neighbors and myself for a system that was never intended to serve
}> us, and never will.
}
}The irony is that they keep trying to convince everyone to use mass
}transit, then don't make it available to use. I used to feel real
}guilty in grad school since I lived one mile away and drove - but the
}last bus usually came at a mere 11pm, only one one per hour, and worse
}on weekends, and walking home at 2am meant you tripped on things in
}the dark a lot. (but it was very convenient as an undergrad)
You're supposed to arrange your life so that mass transit is
convenient for you.
--
Matthew T. Russotto russ...@pond.com
"Extremism in defense of liberty is no vice, and moderation in pursuit
of justice is no virtue."
okbl...@usa.net
ne...@adamcadre.ac wrote:
>
> Assuming you're not being sarcastic -- we already have enough problems
> with people thinking a lot about themselves and not much about the
> society in which we live. Mass transit in Southern California, at
> least at present, is intended for people who need to get from place
> to place but can't afford cars.
A common misconception. If that were true, however, the Transit Authority
never would have hiked the bus rates (which serve lower income people) in
order to subsidize the--what the hell is that thing called? the blue
line?--train that serves primarily middle- and upper-middle class.
Mass transit in Southern California is intended to line the pockets of
politicians and contractors and, as a by-product, screw up the streets*
(remember when Hollywood Blvd. collapsed?), and the final product (a subway
that will probably destroy itself and big parts of the city when the next
earthquake hits) is insignificant to those who commissioned it.
(Wow, how cynical is that?)
> I took the bus for several years, and
> I always knew when strawberries were in season from how crowded the
> bus was, since the only people who made use of it other than me were
> local migrant workers. Now, if we allow people to "opt out" of
> paying for mass transit if they don't use it, we're left in the
> ridiculous position of asking people who can't afford automobiles to
> pay for an entire bus system. Feh. Members of our society need mass
> transit, so we as a society need to provide it for them. This means
> everyone.
As far as I know, the bus system (which I don't care for but which serves)
turns a profit. That profit is being used to build systems which don't serve
and particularly don't serve migrant workers.
Regarding the "ridiculousness" of having people pay who can't buy cars pay
for an entire bus system, I don't see it. Do you know how many people a bus
serves in a year and how much a bus costs during that year period? If I
didn't know those things, I wouldn't talk about the "ridiculousness" of it.
Let's say it serves 1,000 people and costs $100,000 (probably high, but
includes the bus driver's salary). Do people taking the bus pay less than
$100 over the course of a year (presuming they use it twice a day, five days
a week, 50 weeks a year)? A monthly bus pass costs over $30 last time I
checked.
These are arbitrary figures, and if this conversation is to be honestly
discussed, we need *real* figures.
Given that I wasn't talking about the bus, however, that's probably not
necessary.
Not to mention the fact that I wasn't talking about some small elite
neighborhood of rich people not being served, but over a million lower- and
middle-class people whom the train is not expected to serve.
I'm also not going to address the concept of forcing one group of people to
pay for things on behalf of "society". That's the sort of discussion that
tends to lead to acrimony.
[ok]
*Not to mention that the corner of Vermont and Sunset has been under
construction for 9 years now, all related to this noble goal of mass transit.
okbl...@usa.net
fake...@anti-spam.address (Neil K.) wrote:
>
> Yeah, the nerve of those selfish jerks! I mean, next they're gonna want
> to extract billions from your pocket to pay for fire stations in other
> communities, for patching potholes in streets in crummy neighbourhoods
> that you'll never drive on, for schools even if you have no kids, for
> police and garbage collection (hell - is there a difference?) in other
> parts of town. What a bunch of commies! Next it's gonna be like Canada,
> where you have to pay taxes to run hospitals in towns you'll never visit.
> Fight now before it's too late!
>
Wow, do I have a sign on my back that says "rich jerk" or something?
Do you have any idea of the political situation to which I'm referring? Or
are you just assuming that I'm being selfish here?
Is it possible for people to be disenfranchised without their complaints being
summarily dismissed?
I guess not.
Let me tell you a little story about a neighboring community. Homeless people
were going through their trash on trash day to pick out the recyclables. Now,
I never once heard a story of these people causing a problem, but this
community *really* didn't like them picking through their trash. (It's an
upper-middle class neighborhood, leaning toward upper, and in my experience
many of said people are particularly frightened of homeless people.)
So they got together and managed to push through some ordinances, and now we
all have three different kinds of trash cans, including one for recylcables.
(It's now a crime to take anything out of the recycle can.) This has, of
course, cost millions. And the overall effect is to reduce the amount of
recycling that actually gets done, probably because a person whose immediate
quality of life depends on each recyclable item they find is going to be more
attentive to the task than those doing it currently.
Of course, if I came up here and said "My biggest gripe about the recycling
program is that they want billions of dollars for a service that we don't
really want," I'd probably get the same response.
<sigh>
The program I'm referring to does *not* serve people who can't afford cars.
It's also wildly inappropriate given certain geographical and seismological
characteristics of the city. When put to a vote, the people of the city voted
AGAINST it. (Just as we voted against the freeway condition signs, which were
put up anyway, and which only serve to cause traffic jams.)
In addition, the geographical discrimination I'm referring to is a historical
gripe going back over 60 years, and is tantamount to a political
disenfranchisement, and not a reluctance on the part of the people of that
area to contribute.
On top of that, all I said was that it was my *biggest* gripe, not that it
was a very big gripe. (Which up until I received these responses, it wasn't.
It's growing though.) I'm used to the city squandering money, just like I'm
used to the cops beating up people. I don't know any way to fix it but one
person at a time, which I try to do.
Now, as someone who has been labelled everything from an anarchist to a
communist (and has taken some satisfaction in it), this really shouldn't bug
me. Nor should I be surprised. (I can see conservatives going "Yeah, baby!
Let 'em walk!" and liberals going "Oh, how terrible, he doesn't want to spend
his whole life in the service of the government.")
But it does. I have no idea what I'm going to do about it. Probably just be
bugged for a while.
[ok, the selfish, uncaring, rich jerk]
okbl...@usa.net
Hey, thanks. I sometimes forget where I am and that I must defend
every off-hand statement with a full political platform statement so that the
right people hate me.
> I'll suggest
> that in LA gripes with the MTA are understandable, considering that they
> are, basically, a bunch of money-grubbing fuck-ups. Sheesh, how much
> money was dumped into a subway project that produced, what, like TEN
> MILES of track. (I think the cost worked out to $140 million per mile
> or so.) This goes a long way towards explaining why there's a lot of
> (perfectly justified IMHO) resentment floating around.
THANK YOU!
> That's no reason
> to hate the bus system, of course, but the fact is a lot of the problems
> with the buses were due to funds that should have gone to them being
> diverted to the subway system. Things are improving, though.
I hope your optimism is warranted.
>
> Oh yeah, to put in my $.02 on the old Los Angeles-Tokyo "latitude =
> civilization" thread, I'd like to argue that Los Angeles pretty much IS
> the center of the civilized world. <Runs away.>
WE ARE ALL DOOMED!
[ok]
okbl...@usa.net
Darin Johnson <da...@usa.net.NOSPAM> wrote:
>
> The irony is that they keep trying to convince everyone to use mass
> transit, then don't make it available to use. I used to feel real
> guilty in grad school since I lived one mile away and drove - but the
> last bus usually came at a mere 11pm, only one one per hour, and worse
> on weekends, and walking home at 2am meant you tripped on things in
> the dark a lot. (but it was very convenient as an undergrad)
I've generally walked wherever possible. I'd rather walk than drive. And I'm
seldom in a hurry. But I've experienced the same thing re feeling guilty and
tasting the irony.
> The commuter train was odd, because I tried to take it downtown for
> jury duty - and downtown is traditionally where mass transit is
> designed to take people - but there were no parking lots near the
> train stops for me to use (which I didn't find out about in advance).
Yeah, what the heck is *that* about?
> Turns out the closest train stop was also the spot where a lot of
> people worked, so it was designed assuming few locals would be using
> it (there were drop off curbs, perhaps they assumed everyone had
> spouses?). I *tried* to be a good little citizen when commuting
> downtown for jury duty, but over half the time I ended up driving
> the whole way.
It sort of defines frustration, doesn't it?
okbl...@usa.net
dg@ (David Given) wrote:
> In article <36C06F76...@ucla.edu>, Jon Petersen <en...@ucla.edu>
wrote:
> [...]
> >civilization" thread, I'd like to argue that Los Angeles pretty much IS
> >the center of the civilized world. <Runs away.>
>
> don't have the necessary protection?
>
That would be the center of the planet.
We =are= the center of the civilized world. The world scrapes and bows to our
mind-numbing movies and TV programs, even as we suck in new converts with
staged New Years Day paradse that imply it is actually warm and sunny here in
January! Our plan for world domination is nearly complete!
Adam Cadre
> Mass transit in Southern California is intended to line the pockets
> of politicians and contractors and, as a by-product, screw up the
> streets* (remember when Hollywood Blvd. collapsed?), and the final
> product (a subway that will probably destroy itself and big parts of
> the city when the next earthquake hits) is insignificant to those who
> commissioned it.
Ah, I see the problem. Mea culpa.
I live in Orange County. I'm pretty much completely unaware of what's
going on with LA's attempt at a train/subway system, because I avoid
Los Angeles County at all costs. When you referred to mass transit in
Southern California, I immediately equated it with the OCTA, and
assumed your gripe was with having to pay taxes to fund the RTD or
whatever Los Angeles County's equivalent of the OCTA is.
From what I've heard, circa the 1920s Los Angeles had one of the
finest mass transit systems in the world, but it was more or less
quashed by auto interests. It may well be that it's too late to
reestablish mass transit in LA County at this point.
"Lost Los Angeles", anyone?
R. Alan Monroe
>to hate the bus system, of course, but the fact is a lot of the problems
Speaking of buses and highways, didn't the movie "Speed" take place around
there? *duck*
Have fun
Alan
okbl...@usa.net
No hard feelings.
> I live in Orange County. I'm pretty much completely unaware of what's
> going on with LA's attempt at a train/subway system, because I avoid
> Los Angeles County at all costs.
I know what you mean. If it weren't for the occasional trip to San Diego, I
wouldn't even pass *through* Orange County. ;-)
> When you referred to mass transit in
> Southern California, I immediately equated it with the OCTA, and
> assumed your gripe was with having to pay taxes to fund the RTD or
> whatever Los Angeles County's equivalent of the OCTA is.
Well, when I have actually *stopped* in OC (only to go to Disneyland or
Knott's Berry Farm, I swear), I got the distinct impression that the SCRTD,
despite its "SC" didn't actually serve OC, and assumed it was part of that
charming L.A. habit of us considering ourselves, alone, to *be* Southern
California.
I consider city taxes to be largely unimportant, frankly. (I probably
shouldn't since I live in such an expensive city, but I don't get excited over
local money issues.) In fact, I wish they would just take the money and go to
Bimini, or wherever it is they're going to end up when this thing falls apart.
I just don't want them to destroy my city and/or kill people in the process.
> From what I've heard, circa the 1920s Los Angeles had one of the
> finest mass transit systems in the world, but it was more or less
> quashed by auto interests. It may well be that it's too late to
> reestablish mass transit in LA County at this point.
The Red Car served well into the '40s, actually. I doubt it would serve
today. Studies on rebuilding it, if for no other reason than to restore part
of the history of the city, seem to suggest that it would be prohibitively
expensive.
> "Lost Los Angeles", anyone?
Tempting. I suspect something like that would almost invariably turn out to
be parody, however.
Ross Presser
[snip]
> We =are= the center of the civilized world. The world scrapes and bows to our
> mind-numbing movies and TV programs, even as we suck in new converts with
> staged New Years Day paradse that imply it is actually warm and sunny here in
> January! Our plan for world domination is nearly complete!
>
> [ok]
>
> -----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
> http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
Well, at least I'm immunized against the parades. Being from the
Philadelphia area, I would *never* *NEVER* spend any time watching a
pointless California parade when there is the vastly superior and
local Mummers parade to enjoy.
>WHAT IS MUMMERS PARADE
It's a parade that's held on New Years Day in Philadelphia.
>EXAMINE MUMMERS PARADE
It's full of mummers.
>EXAMINE MUMMER
He is dressed in an extremely large and silly costume, is dancing with
indifferent skill, and most likely is playing a banjo.
>CHANGE CHANNEL
Don't be ridiculous. EVERYBODY watches the Mummers Parade.
Matthew T. Russotto
Ross Presser <ross_p...@NOSPAMimtek.com> wrote:
}
}Well, at least I'm immunized against the parades. Being from the
}Philadelphia area, I would *never* *NEVER* spend any time watching a
}pointless California parade when there is the vastly superior and
}local Mummers parade to enjoy.
}
}>WHAT IS MUMMERS PARADE
}
}It's a parade that's held on New Years Day in Philadelphia.
}
}>EXAMINE MUMMERS PARADE
}
}It's full of mummers.
}
}>EXAMINE MUMMER
}
}He is dressed in an extremely large and silly costume, is dancing with
}indifferent skill, and most likely is playing a banjo.
}
}>CHANGE CHANNEL
}
}Don't be ridiculous. EVERYBODY watches the Mummers Parade.
Yeah, but not on TV. You're supposed to go out and freeze your
<adventurers do not use that language> off on 2nd street or Broad
Street.