A private collection of material focusing on the never ending joys of the Trimet industrial complex-Follow the Twitter feed for complete coverage and trimet scanner calls
https://twitter.com/AlYourPalster
It's nice to see that some sanity prevailed in the comments, and pointed out that Jack is dishonest by encouraging (through posting/passing) speculation and untrue, unchecked facts.
He doesn't know and hasn't investigated if they were "honchos" (as in executives), if they really did come from the same place (after all, TriMet has multiple operating bases), and whether they actually could have come by train.
Now, if he did some investigation (and, yes, there are ways to do it besides asking the official spokespeople, such as by asking and observing the people in question) and asked questions in a positive and constructive way, that would be good and healthy. But, instead, he prefers to just assume that government is bad and not actually try to find the real truth.
And the truth, from my knowledge, is that these probably were lowly supervisors, who can come from all corners of the system where they have assigned territories, who need to be ready and able to tend to emergencies and other urgent situations, and probably were there for a "fare mission", in which they gather in order to blitz trains and try to check the fares of most/all passengers.
If he had found that out, he could of asked questions like, shouldn't there be dedicated fare enforcers who do stick to trains (go without vehicles) and do it full time instead of one-time sweeps by supervisors, shouldn't those supervisors be in their territories in case something happens, etc. But he didn't do that.
It's nice to see that some sanity prevailed in the comments, and pointed out that Jack is dishonest by encouraging (through posting/passing) speculation and untrue, unchecked facts.
ReplyDeleteHe doesn't know and hasn't investigated if they were "honchos" (as in executives), if they really did come from the same place (after all, TriMet has multiple operating bases), and whether they actually could have come by train.
Now, if he did some investigation (and, yes, there are ways to do it besides asking the official spokespeople, such as by asking and observing the people in question) and asked questions in a positive and constructive way, that would be good and healthy. But, instead, he prefers to just assume that government is bad and not actually try to find the real truth.
And the truth, from my knowledge, is that these probably were lowly supervisors, who can come from all corners of the system where they have assigned territories, who need to be ready and able to tend to emergencies and other urgent situations, and probably were there for a "fare mission", in which they gather in order to blitz trains and try to check the fares of most/all passengers.
If he had found that out, he could of asked questions like, shouldn't there be dedicated fare enforcers who do stick to trains (go without vehicles) and do it full time instead of one-time sweeps by supervisors, shouldn't those supervisors be in their territories in case something happens, etc. But he didn't do that.