Can’t think of a better community to ask.

  • @JamesFire
    link
    English
    23 days ago

    That doesn’t address anything he said.

    • @someguy3OP
      link
      English
      -1
      edit-2
      3 days ago

      … You are on the train. The station you want to get off is coming up soon. You stand up. You walk down the stairs. You stand at the doors. So far this is all before the station you want to get off at. When you arrive at the station you want to get off at, you walk off. That solves the getting off quickly problem. You don’t need lots and lots and lots of stairs to the point that it takes up more seating capacity than a second floor.

      • @JamesFire
        link
        English
        22 days ago

        That scenario is assuming it’s not packed, and that there is only one person trying to do it.

        Which is exactly why you didn’t address anything he said, and why this still doesn’t.

        • @someguy3OP
          link
          English
          -12 days ago

          Being crushingly packed it a valid concern but yes it addresses his point. As does this: don’t sit on the top if your station is one of the first 1-2 downtown, where you can’t get down to the first floor.

          You’re very adversarial for some reason so ciao.

          • @JamesFire
            link
            English
            12 days ago

            but yes it addresses his point.

            No, it doesn’t.

            His entire point is that subway trains have a lot of doors, leading to a lower seat/door ratio. Your response doesn’t at all address that this ratio would change, or the actual repercussions of changing it.

            In other words, you don’t know what you’re talking about, but you’re acting like you do.

            You’re very adversarial for some reason so ciao.

            I am matter-of-factly telling you that you’re not making a relevant point. If that’s “adversarial” to you, then you need to get your detector calibrated.