The East London Line extension

[Undisputedtruth]

Bic Basher Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Undisputedtruth Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

>

> >

> > It seems people are happy to give out wrong

> > information and then blame the person for

> > correcting them. What arrogance!

>

> Pot, kettle....

Nonsense, my information is accurate unlike yours.

[Lloyd_F]

http://www.tfl.gov.uk/corporate/projectsandschemes/15403.aspx

This link shows how tfl plan for the local lines, now and in the future. There will be some winners it looks like there will be 2 more LB trains from ED in the future, and a lot more options for travel from Peckham Rye. Victoria from all stations looks like it's going to be woefully underserviced peak and non peak times (Changing via CLJ is no substitution for a 10 minute direct train!)

Denmark Hill, Wandsworth Road, and Clapham High Street passengers heading central are the real losers in this change. Hopefully they will run some sort of loop service from Vic to Lewisham area via Denmark Hill and Peckham Rye until LB is back in full action.

[Bic Basher]

Undisputedtruth Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Bic Basher Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > Undisputedtruth Wrote:

> >

> --------------------------------------------------

>

> > -----

> >

> > >

> > > It seems people are happy to give out wrong

> > > information and then blame the person for

> > > correcting them. What arrogance!

> >

> > Pot, kettle....

>

> Nonsense, my information is accurate unlike yours.

Which you spin to meet your own objectives, where as I can see both sides without being rude and childish which you clearly are.

However, unless anything else constructive comes out of this conversation, which I doubt will come out of undisputedtruth's mouth, I'm out of here.

[Undisputedtruth]

I'm afraid you have said nothing remotely useful here. Unfortunately, name calling and giving out misleading information is the best you can do.

[Michael Palaeologus]

You are transfixed by Victoria being the only destination for people using the SLL. Most simply pass through Victoria to points east or west. The ELLE allows them to go east or west without going through Victoria and so reduces the pressure on that station.

[Bic Basher]

Michael Palaeologus Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> You are transfixed by Victoria being the only

> destination for people using the SLL. Most simply

> pass through Victoria to points east or west. The

> ELLE allows them to go east or west without going

> through Victoria and so reduces the pressure on

> that station.

The ELL was designed not to take passengers to a central London terminus, but to give passengers easier access to connections, particularly to the tube network and at Clapham Junction where there's a multitude of national rail services to Southern England as well as Victoria and Waterloo.

The interchange at Canada Water is easier than walking from the end of platform 16 to the tube platforms at London Bridge which can take 5/7 mins.

As I already use the Overground, if I'm travelling to a Zone 1 tube station, except for London Bridge, Waterloo East or Charing Cross, I use the Overground and tube, it also works out cheaper for me using Oyster PAYG.

[Michael Palaeologus]

Quite .....

[Undisputedtruth]

Michael Palaeologus Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> You are transfixed by Victoria being the only

> destination for people using the SLL. Most simply

> pass through Victoria to points east or west. The

> ELLE allows them to go east or west without going

> through Victoria and so reduces the pressure on

> that station.

No, but I suspect you're not a regular user of the South London Line to know any better. Basically, the SLL offers dual access to London Bridge or Victoria. As many others have said, most people do need to travel into central London areas and this is something that the ELL just cannot do.

This has nothing to do with transfixation but your inability to understand the bigger picture.

[Bic Basher]

So in UDT's world, this is how it goes.

1. If you don't use the SLL - you don't understand the bigger picture.

2. Everyone travels to Victoria, period.

3. No-one EVER uses the bus, I mean, what's the point of all those bus routes which pick up all those people on a daily basis when you can wait for a SLL train to Victoria.

4. If you don't have a copy of the South London Rail Utilisation Strategy to hand, you give out misleading information.

5. Ensure you spin or put down other members of EDF to ensure only your point is heard.

6. Also post absolute crap on topics from sash windows to football, so that you're the Mac Daddy of EDF.

7. Go on other forums where same thread is being discussed, pretend to be sensible, then resort to trolling when you don't get your own way when rail experts debate your viewpoint.

8. Be nice to the one or two people who agree with you, including local politicians.

[Undisputedtruth]

Actually, there have been a large number of people supporting the SLL. It seems it's only Michael and you that doesn't. Nothing to lose sleep over.

Mind you, I suspect you want to be a transport wanna be. Perhaps that is why you go to other forums and bring back back hearsays and present them as facts. I'm sure there are people daft enough to believe it. No self-respecting transport campaign organisation will have you,

As I've always said, you're out of your depth on transport matters. Name calling and making up nonsense is your limit. Anything factual is purely out of your reach.

[showboat]

UDT - you may well be right (on this issue at least) but my God you're pretty unpleasant with it.

[antantant]

Personally, I appreciate UDT standing up for the side of the arguement that I believe is correct.

[Michael Palaeologus]

The fact that only a few of us can be bothered to challenge UDT and his diatribes does not mean that we are in the minority.

I guess that most people accept that it is just going to happen and so cant be bothered to wade in.

[showboat]

antantant Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Personally, I appreciate UDT standing up for the

> side of the arguement that I believe is correct.

Fair enough that he's standing up for it, but he descends into insults and condescension of the type he accuses others of and then says "who, me?". Takes some big brass ones to be that arrogant and hypocritical.

[James]

Come along children, play nicely please.

[antantant]

I see what you're saying, but disagree.

[Undisputedtruth]

Michael Palaeologus Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> The fact that only a few of us can be bothered to

> challenge UDT and his diatribes does not mean that

> we are in the minority.

A few? Just Bic Bash and you. Hardly any consensus on the forum, is it?

> I guess that most people accept that it is just

> going to happen and so cant be bothered to wade

> in.

Pure guess or rather a fantasy.

But please show me your councillors giving support to your arguments.

[Undisputedtruth]

showboat Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> antantant Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > Personally, I appreciate UDT standing up for

> the

> > side of the arguement that I believe is

> correct.

>

>

> Fair enough that he's standing up for it, but he

> descends into insults and condescension of the

> type he accuses others of and then says "who,

> me?". Takes some big brass ones to be that

> arrogant and hypocritical.

Completely disagree. If I wanted to give abuse then would have been far stronger in my language.

[showboat]

No one likes a show off... :-)

Look, I'm not impressed by that statement - if you can't see how you've been rude then that conversation is over - and I think you're pretty aggresive frankly, but hey - it's your problem if you want to be like that. I just think you make yourself look bad.

I think it's a shame when you have good points.

[Zebedee Tring]

Some of the aggressive opinionated stuff on this thread reminds me of the bullying school playground language that I thought I'd left behind nearly fifty years ago. At least when we were in the playground we had the excuse of being only 13 years old.

In my post above, I set out what is hopefully a balanced argument pro and con the impending ELL and SLL changes. It would help the debate if posters tried to follow a similar tone, whether or not they are in favour of the arguments presented by other posters

[Undisputedtruth]

showboat Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> No one likes a show off... :-)

>

> Look, I'm not impressed by that statement - if you

> can't see how you've been rude then that

> conversation is over - and I think you're pretty

> aggresive frankly, but hey - it's your problem if

> you want to be like that. I just think you make

> yourself look bad.

>

> I think it's a shame when you have good points.

Who is showing off and what a ridiculous statement. Thousands of people rely on the SLL and yet you want to make the argument into a personality contest. It really does irks me when people can't get the facts right on a very serious matter. Perhaps you are confusing aggression with irritation.

[Michael Palaeologus]

You are just like a school yard bully. Its laughable. You are irritated because people wont agree with you and you have to have the last word. Dont you.

[showboat]

As I said, conversation over. No debate possible with someone like you.

[Bic Basher]

antantant Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Personally, I appreciate UDT standing up for the

> side of the arguement that I believe is correct.

In which way?

This thread is a classic example of how trolling derails (no pun intended) what should be a reasonable debate on a topic which will affect many of EDF's members.

The best thing is now is not to feed him and simply debate the topic, also sign up to the Rail UK Forums thread and discuss it there too, I'm sure it'd give them a broader representation of views from other people in the area and not just him and me.

[Undisputedtruth]

@Bic Basher, MP & showboat

I failed to see what valuable contribution you've made to the thread other than engaging in making personal remarks. But I take heart in what antantant wrote as vindication:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Personally, I appreciate UDT standing up for the

> side of the arguement that I believe is correct.

*UDT waves bye bye*