"High Speed Rail" and other hot button issues.

Otto Vondrak wrote:Can I say something about politics, in general?

Can you? Well I suppose the reader can judge whether or not you CAN ... but you MAY try. (Just kidding ... but this thread would be incomplete without a grammar flame. Now all we need to do is work Hitler into the argument.)

It's one thing to say, "The Roosevelt administration is going to spend $50 on new napkins for all diner cars in 2011." It's another thing to draw a conclusion from that. "it's about time!" or "what a waste" are all valid reactions. But then to delve into some drawn-out conversation with charts and graphs and statistics from the Congressional Reporting Service... Frankly, that's where you lose me.

Where politics gets annoying for me is when name calling is involved. When "the stupid Whig party" is blamed for not funding/cutting funding in the past. When people complain that if we hadn't spent so much money rebuilding Europe and Japan after bombing the heck out of them America would have been able to keep the interurbans alive and the natural progression to high speed rail would not have been interrupted by failing railroads. Mistakes have been made ... by all parties (not just the Whigs). But somehow we get into the (liberal / conservative / socialist / communist / capitalist) my party is better than your party and all your politicians are crooks that are ruining America battles that go nowhere fast.

Fortunately that doesn't come up too often ... but the question of "what are you going to do about it" needs to be more than throw stones on the internet or start some online crusade to throw the offending party out of office. Influencing the process CAN be done without removing anyone from office. Why not work WITH the government we have instead of trying to overthrow it? Is the railroad.net Amtrak forum a political action group? I think not!

The fact that the Roosevelt administration is spending money on rail is a simple fact. The announcement is news and it certainly belongs in a forum on rail. I agree the line is crossed when the names start flying and the (usually) off topic rambling about percentage of budgets and political leanings gets mixed in. But I'd bet that if you PM'd every person that posted one of the examples in your post they would claim they were on topic.

After all, if someone claims too much is being spent, isn't the opposite argument showing too little has been spent? Is no proof allowed? Or should we just keep posting unsourced opinions lest we fall into the trap of providing too much data? Sometimes a thread can end when appropriate data is presented. Other times the battle becomes my data is better than your data. I don't believe there is one predetermined right answer as to what is too much. It depends on the reader and the topic at hand.

GoKeefe wrote:

... With regard to ideas or proposals that are entirely member generated I think having a 'Fantasy Island' forum might be useful. To a certain extent you may have indicated that the High Speed Rail forum serves this purpose for certain proposals invovlving high speed rail and even Maglev, but there are many other ideas that have no relation to high speed rail at all which many people would like to discuss. I understand creation of this forum might initially seem to be a daunting burden of future moderation but in the end it will probably make moderating the Amtrak forum and others easier.

I would second this proposal. There should be somewhere on the forum where imagination and creativity can be expressed. New ideas aren't always practical when they first appear, but with exposure and discussion they might take a useful shape. It seems worth a try. If you had such a forum, you could then shunt a post with too much fantasy over to the new forum, and let the thread continue.

Otto Vondrak wrote:I can't believe that there have been 48 views and none of you have a comment?

Well I have to say thank you RR.N for helping me and all those that work in the locomotive industry that need some piece of mind of hopes of getting back to work soon. I can come here and ask questions like when will bids go out to build, how many will be ordered, budget spending. etc . RR.N has given me some piece of mind haven't answered all me Q but if I keep asking Q I'll get answers. I know there is no Crystal ball however RR.N is my Crystal ball.
Thank you.
Ira

Otto Vondrak wrote: 1) "They should make the truckers pay for napkins in rest stops! Why, there's at least 50 trucks a day that go through my town! No one's made a law against that!"

2) "The B&O never spent that much on napkins. Not since they enacted the Federal Napkin Tax."

3) "You know, if they only used the kinds of napkins that they had on the RF&P, there'd be no need to replace them year after year. Why, I remember when my grandfather would bring home napkins from work. Did I ever tell you about the time nickels had buffaloes on them?"

4) "I think Amtrak should buy red-white-and-blue napkins."

5) "What's your favorite napkin? If you were in charge of Amtrak, what kinds of napkins would you get?"

6) "China has high-speed napkins, it's absurd that we do not. Thanks for nothing, [politician name]!"

7) "We don't need high-speed napkins. It only makes sense in Europe where the population is denser. Besides, high speed napkins wont work on our conventional dining car tables. It's a waste and another boondoggle by the Roosevelt administration!"

8) "HOW DO I APPLY FOR A JOB AS A NAPKIN FOLDER????!!!! I HAVE BEEN TRYING TO GET A JOB AS A NAPKIN FOLDER BUT NO ONE AT AMTRACK WILL CALL ME BACK???!!!!"

9) "[Fourteen pages of political rant supported by charts and graphs].

10) "What are we talking about again? -otto-"

OK, Otto, you just made me start laughing out loud at my desk. Definitely see your point...

Ridgefielder wrote:

Otto Vondrak wrote: 1) "They should make the truckers pay for napkins in rest stops! Why, there's at least 50 trucks a day that go through my town! No one's made a law against that!"

2) "The B&O never spent that much on napkins. Not since they enacted the Federal Napkin Tax."

3) "You know, if they only used the kinds of napkins that they had on the RF&P, there'd be no need to replace them year after year. Why, I remember when my grandfather would bring home napkins from work. Did I ever tell you about the time nickels had buffaloes on them?"

4) "I think Amtrak should buy red-white-and-blue napkins."

5) "What's your favorite napkin? If you were in charge of Amtrak, what kinds of napkins would you get?"

6) "China has high-speed napkins, it's absurd that we do not. Thanks for nothing, [politician name]!"

7) "We don't need high-speed napkins. It only makes sense in Europe where the population is denser. Besides, high speed napkins wont work on our conventional dining car tables. It's a waste and another boondoggle by the Roosevelt administration!"

8) "HOW DO I APPLY FOR A JOB AS A NAPKIN FOLDER????!!!! I HAVE BEEN TRYING TO GET A JOB AS A NAPKIN FOLDER BUT NO ONE AT AMTRACK WILL CALL ME BACK???!!!!"

9) "[Fourteen pages of political rant supported by charts and graphs].

10) "What are we talking about again? -otto-"

OK, Otto, you just made start laughing out loud at my desk. Definitely see your point...

He forgot the eventual:

11) "218-51-1 napkins"

12) "Sold a bag of (paper) goods"

13) "Why don't they just use the perfectly-good Turboliner napkins they have sitting in storage?"

Alloy wrote:GoKeefe wrote:

... With regard to ideas or proposals that are entirely member generated I think having a 'Fantasy Island' forum might be useful...

I would second this proposal. There should be somewhere on the forum where imagination and creativity can be expresse.

So we can see who can craft the most extravagant fish tale of all time?

I wish I could dig up 2003's "OMG I JUST SAW GG-1'S PULLING FREIGHT ON THE RIVER LINE!!11!!11!!" thread from Ye Olde New Jersey Railfan Forum...

-otto-

Otto,

Not at all. The idea is that people can have a place to write about and discuss ideas for things they would like to see as opposed to things that have been proposed or are currently happenning 'on the outside'. We consistently have problems in threads and forums with posts and topics that discuss the so-called 'flights of fantasy', as you have mentioned.

There are many people who have ideas that would like to discuss these proposals with either like-minded individuals or critical professionals at least for the sake of better understanding, "Why isn't this done already?" There is a great deal of learning that takes place in some of these conversations before the subject is exhausted.

Admittedly, there are others who simply want a place to discuss or reminisce, "What might have been" (e.g. Turboliners). If Railroad.net really is a 'rail enthusiast' community as opposed to a 'rail professional' commnuity then I have a hard time understanding why original ideas and content or discussion of certain topics shouldn't be given their own place, even when the subject or content of the discussion may seem superfluous or irrelevant. I do understand that the Turboliner dicussion has a unique history that consequently led to its permanent termination. I wonder if part of the problem may have been that the ideas were allowed to be discussed in a forum reserved for the real world as opposed to an 'open' forum.

Otto Vondrak wrote:

Alloy wrote:GoKeefe wrote:

... With regard to ideas or proposals that are entirely member generated I think having a 'Fantasy Island' forum might be useful...

I would second this proposal. There should be somewhere on the forum where imagination and creativity can be expresse.

So we can see who can craft the most extravagant fish tale of all time?

I wish I could dig up 2003's "OMG I JUST SAW GG-1'S PULLING FREIGHT ON THE RIVER LINE!!11!!11!!" thread from Ye Olde New Jersey Railfan Forum...

-otto-

Otto, I assume you are thinking that if said place was created, most if not all of the conversation would be "extravagant fish tale(s)?" Some of it may be but there is some that could become a reality. Again, it is the moderator who decides whether or not it is practical (and/or a waste of time) but there may be some benefit to allowing such conversations. You said in a earlier post in this thread that "flights of fantasy" are "fun to a relative few" but may indeed be fun to many more users than you think.

If the theoretical is a big problem/issue, maybe you should add something to the railroad.net rules so posters know not to start such a thread/topic. (So they know it is against the rules) Is there something in the rules specifically for such topics already?

And well said gokeefe, I agree... I have learned quite a bit in those kinds of conversations.

Warren

BM6569 wrote:If the theoretical is a big problem/issue, maybe you should add something to the railroad.net rules so posters know not to start such a thread/topic. (So they know it is against the rules) Is there something in the rules specifically for such topics already?

I tend to discourage "flights of fancy," but I don't think we're going to add a rule defining and prohibiting threads like that.

As far as "flights of fancy" threads developing into a sort of transportation "think tank," let me offer my thoughts on this. Most of us are not professional transportation planners. We have to rely on our own smarts and experience, and hopefully a little solid research to make our points. Here's a hypothetical situation...

It is very easy to get caught up in youthful exuberance and wonder, "Why can't we run a second train between Boston and Albany? I bet lots of people would ride it! My grandma remembers when there were more trains on the B&A and I know she would ride it!"

I'd rather see a discussion stem from a question like this: "There's only one train between Boston and Albany, and I've found out that it has a weekly ridership of 86 people. I've also found out that Slappy Trailways Bus Co. offers six departures from Boston and they have an average weekly ridership of 232 people. Slappy also gets a subsidy of $26 per passenger from the state to cover three extra departures. Why can't we apply that subsidy to Amtrak to go towards the cost of a second Boston departure? My grandma used to enjoy riding the New England States, I know she would prefer the comfort of the train over the bus any day!"

In the first example, we're just excited to be here. We are certain that more people would ride because, heck, everyone loves trains. Even grandma! In a thread like that, you're asking the other members to do the heavy lifting for you, dragging out all the important details that you may have overlooked.

In the second example, a particular issue is raised (second Amtrak train between Albany and Boston), some supporting facts are brought in (the ridership stats), and a potential solution is outlined (re-applying an existing subsidy to Amtrak). Now, it's not that I expect everyone to walk into the Amtrak forum armed with stats and graphs and charts (I hate those) and twenty seven 8x10 color glossy pictures with circles and arrows and a paragraph on the back of each one. But if you can add some substance to your post, not only will you create a stronger conversation, but you might actually learn something new that you can share with everyone.

-otto-

My problem is that they start all these projects without completing them. If such a project was started, I would like to see contingency plans for it to be finished regardless of if budget ran out.

One more thought from the "let's police ourselves so the moderators don't have to" department:

Can we stop flaming people who don't post 100% on topic? Posts in threads that only serve to point out that a previous post or the thread itself is somehow off topic serve no purpose but to take the thread off topic. The discussion becomes an argument over whether the thread or post belongs in the forum instead of a discussion of the topic raised. If the thread is really too far off topic the moderators can handle it without the holier than thou crowd jumping all over posters who ask a simple question. It is that kind of arrogance that scares off new readers and posters.

Remember, everyone was a newbee once! Be polite.

justalurker66 wrote:One more thought from the "let's police ourselves so the moderators don't have to" department:

Can we stop flaming people who don't post 100% on topic? Posts in threads that only serve to point out that a previous post or the thread itself is somehow off topic serve no purpose but to take the thread off topic. The discussion becomes an argument over whether the thread or post belongs in the forum instead of a discussion of the topic raised. If the thread is really too far off topic the moderators can handle it without the holier than thou crowd jumping all over posters who ask a simple question. It is that kind of arrogance that scares off new readers and posters.

Remember, everyone was a newbee once! Be polite.

Well, I for one don't consider it POLITE to be discussing airports and airplanes on a railroad forum. Yes, sometimes the topic under discussion is so far off topic it's indecently impolite.

electricron wrote:Well, I for one don't consider it POLITE to be discussing airports and airplanes on a railroad forum. Yes, sometimes the topic under discussion is so far off topic it's indecently impolite.

A good reason to have moderators to handle such problems (although comparisons between air service and railroad service has validity).
If you're not a moderator who is tasked with running the forum can you simply show some self control and either 1) ignore the off-topic or thread drift posts, 2) bring the thread back to topic - not by attacking a poster but by making a post on the actual topic of the thread, or 3) report the thread post to the appropriate authority?

Examples:
A thread starts comparing the quality of napkins on airplanes vs trains. You feel that thread is off topic. Instead of flaming the poster for bringing it up just ignore the thread.
A thread starts asking about air service between two cities with no mention of rail. Obviously off-topic. Instead of flaming the poster use the report post function ... or turn the topic to Amtrak if those two cities are rail served.
A thread starts talking about long distance train travel on Amtrak. Someone posts that they would rather fly. Instead of flaming the poster for mentioning air travel ignore the post. If you must post bring the topic back to trains.

Flaming serves NO ONE except the ego of the person doing the flaming. A soft answer is better. If unskilled in soft answers then it is better to remain silent.

Unless, of course, I've misunderstood and Otto wants this forum to be full of people attacking each other. I think not.

electricron wrote:Well, I for one don't consider it POLITE to be discussing airports and airplanes on a railroad forum. Yes, sometimes the topic under discussion is so far off topic it's indecently impolite.

To the contrary Mr. Electricron.

Such a discussion has been very beneficial on this forum. Especially when we have a thread of resident posters here complaining how Amtrak personally rapes them in the wallet over the operation of passenger trains...but yet its OK to have federal subsidies for Essential Air Services (EAS), being paid fo fly empty 9 passenger Cessna 400-Series planes to small towns under the guide that there needs to be commercial air service to that location.

I'd rather we returned to the topic at hand... NAPKINS!