|
|
| Re: How the MTA is Destroying the Local Bus System (249033) | |||
 |
|||
| Home > BusChat | |||
|
[ Read Responses | Post a New Response | Return to the Index ] |
|
||
|
Re: How the MTA is Destroying the Local Bus System |
|
|
Posted by Osmosis Jones on Tue Nov 22 17:32:52 2011, in response to Re: How the MTA is Destroying the Local Bus System, posted by Terrapin Station on Tue Nov 22 12:54:13 2011. And Edwards didn't say he was a former operations planning figure. Edwards instead made several statements strongly implying that he has no idea about BrooklynBus's history.He mentioned "Master Armchair Planners" in his post, implying that he does know of his history of being a bus planner. We're not disputing "rights". We're disputing if what BrooklynBus is writing makes any sense, is intelligent, and is based on facts, logic, and reason. I'm disputing whether his "opinions" make any sense, are intelligent, and are based on facts, logic, and reason. For example, someone can have the opinion that the M42 is a fast bus route and does its job well. But if all the facts and logic and reasoning say that the route has an average speed that is well below the average for all Manhattan local bus routes, then that opinion is flawed at best and just plain wrong at worst. I understand what you're saying, we aren't debating rights, but I was responding to a statement made by someone else saying that he shouldn't share his opinion pieces anymore or something of that nature because they disagreed with his pieces. He might use a fact to draw an illogical conclusion. I see, I get where you're coming from there. First of all, how do you know his answer is correct? How do you know it doesn't just sound good? I recently asked him why the B36 has never been extended to Kings Plaza. He told me the local merchants opposed the change because they feared it would cause them to lose business, and upon further research, a hearing was held on the extension at one point, and the idea was soon put off the table afterwards, strongly implying that he was correct. But in these articles and in many of his posts on this forum, he fails to use logic and reasoning and/or misuses facts. All the while he acts like he knows everything because he worked for DCP and NYCT. At the very least, he shouldn't act like he knows what's best. If this is true, it isn't good, but it seems like most people disagreeing with him or point out his factual inaccuracies are attacking him and not doing so constructively and encouraging him to do a better job at checking over those inaccuracies. So which is it? And why isn't he still working there? And if he did leave on his own terms, why did he do so? These are questions you should be asking him, because they could certainly be very relevant to why he writes what he writes. All he says is that he simply retired. You said that he left on unfavorable terms (with his bosses I'm assuming), and I'm trying to find evidence to see if that's true. And if the issue was not with him personally and/or the quality of his ideas, then why has he himself admitted that no current transit executives will respond to his emails and that the Operations Planning department deletes his emails without even reading them? The man himself admits/claims that the MTA doesn't like him and won't/wouldn't do what he wanted and he in turn takes the opportunity to bash them left and right. You don't see a possible connection? I see where you're getting at, yes I guess the possibility does exist that there could be sour grapes involved with his opinions posted here and on the Bites website if true. |
|
|
|