Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > alt.folklore.computers > #156357 > unrolled thread
| Started by | hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com |
|---|---|
| First post | 2016-01-10 19:18 -0800 |
| Last post | 2016-01-12 02:52 +0000 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 388 — 41 participants |
Back to article view | Back to alt.folklore.computers
1976 vs. 2016? hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-10 19:18 -0800
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-01-11 17:34 +1100
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-11 06:50 -0500
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-01-12 05:44 +1100
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-01-11 13:31 +0000
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-01-11 14:15 +0000
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-01-11 15:21 +0000
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-11 18:41 -0500
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Mike Causer <m.r.causer@goglemail.com> - 2016-01-15 20:18 +0000
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? timcaffrey420@gmail.com - 2016-01-15 15:47 -0800
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-01-15 23:25 -0500
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-01-16 06:32 +0000
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Mike Causer <m.r.causer@goglemail.com> - 2016-01-16 18:32 +0000
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-01-16 20:34 +0000
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-01-17 03:21 -0600
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Mike Causer <m.r.causer@goglemail.com> - 2016-01-16 21:06 +0000
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Lon <lon.stowell@comcast.net> - 2016-01-18 08:46 -0700
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Mike Causer <m.r.causer@goglemail.com> - 2016-01-18 22:22 +0000
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-01-11 01:05 -0600
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-01-11 10:56 +0000
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-01-11 17:48 +0000
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? mausg@mail.com - 2016-01-11 19:13 +0000
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Mathias Koerber <mathias@koerber.org> - 2016-01-29 17:45 +0800
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-29 07:32 -0500
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Lawrence Statton <lawrence@senguio.mx> - 2016-01-29 09:25 -0600
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? "Simmy Jacks" <sk98@nospam.com> - 2016-01-30 04:59 +1100
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-01-29 20:12 +0000
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-01-30 09:24 +1100
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-01-29 22:30 +0000
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-01-29 19:22 -0600
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Stephen Wolstenholme <steve@easynn.com> - 2016-01-30 09:31 +0000
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-30 09:45 -0500
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Stephen Wolstenholme <steve@easynn.com> - 2016-01-30 15:30 +0000
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-30 11:18 -0500
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-01-30 14:30 -0800
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-01-30 17:10 -0600
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-30 18:51 -0500
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-01-30 11:03 +0100
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-01-31 11:20 -0500
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-29 19:30 -0500
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-01-30 05:15 +0000
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Mike Spencer <mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> - 2016-01-29 22:05 -0400
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-01-30 15:19 +0000
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Mathias Koerber <mathias@koerber.org> - 2016-02-01 13:27 +0800
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-01-29 19:17 -0600
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-01-29 19:47 -0600
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Mike Spencer <mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> - 2016-01-29 22:09 -0400
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-01-30 14:28 -0800
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-30 18:44 -0500
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-30 18:26 -0800
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-31 04:34 -0500
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-01-31 09:42 +0000
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-02-01 04:54 +1100
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-01-31 21:31 +0000
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-31 19:27 -0500
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-02-01 12:38 +1100
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-02-01 01:43 +0000
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-02-01 13:29 +1100
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-02-01 07:15 +0000
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-02-01 19:56 +1100
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-02-01 21:36 +0000
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-02-02 10:00 +1100
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-02-02 00:39 +0000
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-02-02 13:01 +1100
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-02-02 08:23 +0000
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-02-02 19:30 +1100
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-02-02 09:18 +0000
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-02-02 09:55 +0000
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-02-02 12:19 +0000
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-02-02 16:54 +0000
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-02-02 18:35 +0000
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-02-03 05:22 +1100
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-02-01 07:53 +0000
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-02-01 20:01 +1100
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-02-01 11:02 +0000
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-02-02 05:36 +1100
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-02-01 19:25 +0000
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-02-02 09:27 +1100
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Mathias Koerber <mathias@koerber.org> - 2016-02-02 12:45 +0800
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-02-02 16:23 +1100
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-02-02 08:24 +0000
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-02-02 20:34 +0000
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-02-03 01:18 +0000
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? "Blanco" <rko4410@gmail.com> - 2016-02-03 15:25 +1100
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-02-03 08:45 +0000
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? "Blanco" <rko4410@gmail.com> - 2016-02-03 20:51 +1100
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-01-31 14:09 -0800
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-02-01 12:46 +1100
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-01-31 20:16 -0600
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-31 07:19 -0500
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-01-31 14:46 +0000
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Stephen Wolstenholme <steve@easynn.com> - 2016-01-31 15:22 +0000
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-01-31 15:48 +0000
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? mausg@mail.com - 2016-01-31 16:43 +0000
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-01-31 12:55 -0500
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-01-31 17:55 +0000
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-01-31 20:36 +0000
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-02-01 09:24 +0000
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-02-01 10:07 +0000
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-02-01 10:42 +0000
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Stephen Wolstenholme <steve@easynn.com> - 2016-02-01 12:56 +0000
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Stan Barr <plan.b@bluesomatic.org> - 2016-02-01 16:48 +0000
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Stephen Wolstenholme <steve@easynn.com> - 2016-02-02 09:42 +0000
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Stan Barr <plan.b@bluesomatic.org> - 2016-02-02 17:05 +0000
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-01-31 21:34 +0000
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Mike Causer <m.r.causer@goglemail.com> - 2016-02-02 00:46 +0000
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-02-02 09:58 +0000
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-01-31 15:30 +0000
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? mausg@mail.com - 2016-01-31 16:44 +0000
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-01-31 16:26 -0600
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-02-01 00:06 +0100
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-02-01 13:02 +1100
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-01-31 21:55 -0600
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-02-01 12:52 +1100
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-31 17:59 -0800
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-01-31 20:40 -0600
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-02-01 09:25 +0000
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-02-01 12:52 -0600
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-02-01 21:23 +0000
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-01-31 10:52 -0600
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-01-31 16:13 -0600
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-01-31 16:02 -0600
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-31 17:14 -0500
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-01-31 16:33 -0600
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-01-31 19:11 -0500
Dollar Coins in Coin Op Gear in the US Lawrence Statton <lawrence@senguio.mx> - 2016-01-31 18:35 -0600
Re: Dollar Coins in Coin Op Gear in the US Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-01-31 20:51 -0600
Re: Dollar Coins in Coin Op Gear in the US Lawrence Statton <lawrence@senguio.mx> - 2016-02-01 09:10 -0600
Re: Dollar Coins in Coin Op Gear in the US Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-02-01 13:08 -0600
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-01-31 19:11 -0600
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Lawrence Statton <lawrence@senguio.mx> - 2016-01-31 19:42 -0600
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-01-31 20:09 -0600
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Lawrence Statton <lawrence@senguio.mx> - 2016-02-01 08:59 -0600
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-31 18:10 -0800
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-01-31 21:17 -0600
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-02-01 06:34 -0800
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-02-01 12:01 -0600
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-02-01 14:51 -0500
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? "Blanco" <rko4410@gmail.com> - 2016-02-01 13:18 +1100
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-01-31 22:30 -0500
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Alfred Falk <falk@arc.ab.ca> - 2016-02-01 17:02 +0000
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-02-01 13:08 -0500
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Mike Spencer <mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> - 2016-02-02 03:18 -0400
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-02-02 07:44 +0000
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? "Blanco" <rko4410@gmail.com> - 2016-02-02 19:12 +1100
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-02-02 14:14 +0000
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Stephen Wolstenholme <steve@easynn.com> - 2016-02-02 14:37 +0000
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-01-31 23:10 -0500
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-02-01 09:28 +0000
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-02-01 11:51 -0600
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-02-01 13:07 -0500
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Mike Spencer <mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> - 2016-02-02 03:31 -0400
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-02-02 12:40 -0800
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-02-03 12:45 -0500
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-02-03 18:24 +0000
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-02-01 07:53 +0000
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-02-01 08:12 -0500
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-02-01 16:03 +0000
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-02-01 16:15 +0000
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2016-02-02 06:01 +1100
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-31 17:56 -0800
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-01-31 15:58 -0600
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-31 17:52 -0800
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-02-01 08:12 -0500
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-02-01 12:23 -0600
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-02-01 14:05 -0600
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-02-01 12:43 -0800
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-02-02 00:12 +0000
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-02-01 15:27 -0600
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-02-02 00:08 +0000
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-02-01 18:24 -0600
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-02-01 19:07 -0600
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-30 13:13 -0800
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-01-30 17:03 -0600
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-01-31 02:58 +0100
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-01-30 14:32 -0800
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-01-30 17:08 -0600
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-01-30 07:11 +0000
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-01-30 11:07 -0500
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? mausg@mail.com - 2016-01-30 10:56 +0000
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-01-30 22:00 +0000
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-01-30 17:17 -0600
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2016-01-31 12:56 -0800
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-01-30 14:25 -0800
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-02-02 00:42 -0600
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Mathias Koerber <mathias@koerber.org> - 2016-01-29 17:45 +0800
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-01-29 16:42 -0600
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-01-29 23:25 -0500
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-01-12 05:27 +1100
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Ibmekon <Ibmekon> - 2016-01-11 09:03 +0000
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-01-11 09:06 +0000
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-11 06:27 -0500
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-01-11 14:01 +0000
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-01-11 09:29 -0800
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-11 09:58 -0800
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? mausg@mail.com - 2016-01-11 10:29 +0000
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-01-11 09:45 -0600
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Stan Barr <plan.b@bluesomatic.org> - 2016-01-11 17:06 +0000
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? mausg@mail.com - 2016-01-11 18:55 +0000
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-01-11 19:57 +0000
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-11 12:59 -0800
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-01-12 09:35 +1100
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? mausg@mail.com - 2016-01-12 10:53 +0000
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-01-11 17:48 +0000
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-11 09:54 -0800
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Anonymous <no_email@invalid.invalid> - 2016-01-11 18:43 +0000
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-01-11 13:49 -0500
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Anonymous <no_email@invalid.invalid> - 2016-01-12 01:15 +0000
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-01-12 06:31 +1100
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-11 18:52 -0500
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-11 17:33 -0800
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Morten Reistad <first@last.name,invalid> - 2016-01-12 10:18 +0100
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-01-12 10:12 +0100
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-01-13 04:52 +1100
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-01-12 20:05 +0100
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Jon Elson <elson@pico-systems.com> - 2016-01-12 18:36 -0600
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? "Joe Morris" <j.c.morris@verizon.net> - 2016-01-13 21:27 -0500
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Jon Elson <elson@pico-systems.com> - 2016-01-14 00:15 -0600
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? pechter@pechter.dyndns.org (William Pechter) - 2016-01-13 02:34 +0000
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-01-13 14:16 +1100
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Jon Elson <elson@pico-systems.com> - 2016-01-14 00:23 -0600
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-12 15:14 -0500
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-01-12 22:07 +0000
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-01-15 19:41 -0600
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-01-16 23:56 +0000
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Mike Spencer <mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> - 2016-01-12 02:56 -0400
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-01-12 10:30 +0100
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-12 15:20 -0500
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-01-13 08:40 +1100
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-01-12 05:37 +1100
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-01-11 14:10 -0500
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-11 11:38 -0800
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-01-12 06:59 +1100
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Stan Barr <plan.b@bluesomatic.org> - 2016-01-12 08:28 +0000
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? timcaffrey420@gmail.com - 2016-01-11 11:54 -0800
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-11 11:57 -0800
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-01-11 15:29 -0500
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? mausg@mail.com - 2016-01-11 20:46 +0000
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2016-01-11 19:30 -0800
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-01-11 02:59 -0800
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-11 07:44 -0800
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-01-11 22:39 +0100
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-01-12 13:24 +0000
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Stephen Wolstenholme <steve@easynn.com> - 2016-01-12 13:57 +0000
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-01-13 05:12 +1100
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Stan Barr <plan.b@bluesomatic.org> - 2016-01-12 17:19 +0000
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-01-15 19:38 -0600
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-19 08:07 -0800
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-01-19 15:50 -0500
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-01-13 05:07 +1100
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-01-12 23:48 +0000
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-01-13 11:57 +1100
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-01-13 04:28 +0000
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-01-13 15:47 +1100
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-01-12 19:57 +0100
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-01-13 14:13 +0000
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-01-13 15:15 +0000
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-01-14 13:46 +0000
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2016-01-15 06:20 +1100
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-01-13 14:13 +0000
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2016-01-14 03:10 +1100
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Mike Spencer <mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> - 2016-01-13 23:35 -0400
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-01-14 11:40 -0500
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-01-14 18:55 +0100
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Mike Spencer <mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> - 2016-01-15 01:11 -0400
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2016-01-15 12:10 -0800
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Lon <lon.stowell@comcast.net> - 2016-01-18 08:50 -0700
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Stephen Wolstenholme <steve@easynn.com> - 2016-01-18 16:11 +0000
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-01-18 21:23 +0000
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-01-18 10:04 -0800
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-01-18 10:29 -0800
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2016-01-14 14:16 -0800
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Mike Spencer <mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> - 2016-01-15 01:15 -0400
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Mike Spencer <mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> - 2016-01-13 23:35 -0400
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-11 06:27 -0500
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-11 06:55 -0500
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-01-11 14:07 +0000
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-11 18:36 -0500
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-01-12 06:17 +0000
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-12 07:15 -0800
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? mausg@mail.com - 2016-01-12 11:09 +0000
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-01-12 07:30 -0800
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-01-12 07:41 -0800
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-01-12 18:52 +0000
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-12 11:28 -0500
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-11 07:24 -0800
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-01-11 09:51 -0600
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-01-11 16:04 +0000
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-11 10:18 -0800
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-01-11 09:49 -0800
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-11 10:10 -0800
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-01-11 22:50 +0100
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-01-12 06:11 +1100
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-01-11 22:16 +0100
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-01-11 18:21 -0500
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-11 17:25 -0800
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-01-11 23:24 -0600
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-01-12 06:31 +0000
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-01-12 13:42 -0500
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-12 15:14 -0500
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-01-12 15:43 -0600
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-01-13 09:55 +1100
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-01-12 10:07 +0100
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-12 07:22 -0800
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-01-12 13:58 -0500
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-12 11:53 -0800
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-01-12 15:56 -0500
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-12 13:52 -0800
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-01-13 00:15 +0100
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-12 19:18 -0800
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-01-13 08:29 +0100
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-11 17:10 -0800
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-12 11:28 -0500
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-11 18:32 -0500
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-11 17:07 -0800
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-11 07:34 -0800
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-01-11 16:07 +0000
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-11 11:48 -0500
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-01-11 20:01 +0000
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-01-11 22:28 +0000
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? mausg@mail.com - 2016-01-12 11:03 +0000
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-01-12 18:52 +0000
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-01-12 05:42 +1100
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-01-11 14:57 +0000
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-11 07:15 -0800
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-01-11 16:03 +0000
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-11 11:48 -0500
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-11 10:15 -0800
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-01-11 13:54 -0500
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2016-01-12 06:41 +1100
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-01-11 20:03 +0000
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-01-11 13:15 -0600
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-11 11:55 -0800
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Stan Barr <plan.b@bluesomatic.org> - 2016-01-11 17:12 +0000
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2016-01-11 19:35 -0800
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-01-11 14:03 -0500
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-11 11:26 -0800
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-01-11 20:00 +0000
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-01-11 15:30 -0500
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? mausg@mail.com - 2016-01-11 19:45 +0000
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-01-11 15:27 -0500
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-11 13:10 -0800
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-01-11 18:15 -0500
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-01-11 18:02 -0600
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-11 22:53 -0500
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-01-12 00:06 -0500
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-01-12 14:39 +0000
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-12 16:01 -0500
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-01-12 22:07 +0000
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Stan Barr <plan.b@bluesomatic.org> - 2016-01-12 08:21 +0000
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-12 06:56 -0500
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-01-12 07:19 +0000
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-12 07:26 -0800
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-01-12 16:22 +0000
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-01-12 13:16 -0500
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-01-13 05:23 +1100
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-01-18 19:52 -0600
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-01-18 23:22 -0600
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-01-19 10:14 -0600
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-01-19 15:52 -0500
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-01-12 13:59 -0500
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Mike Spencer <mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> - 2016-01-13 23:15 -0400
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-01-14 05:44 +0000
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? mausg@mail.com - 2016-01-12 10:56 +0000
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-01-12 13:49 -0500
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-01-12 13:24 +0000
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-01-12 16:18 +0000
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-01-12 14:37 +0000
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-12 07:35 -0800
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Stan Barr <plan.b@bluesomatic.org> - 2016-01-12 08:17 +0000
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-01-12 13:24 +0000
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-12 11:28 -0500
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-01-12 17:21 +0000
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-01-12 18:52 +0000
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-01-15 19:44 -0600
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-01-12 11:31 -0600
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-01-12 14:00 -0500
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-12 15:14 -0500
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-01-12 06:00 +1100
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Stephen Wolstenholme <steve@easynn.com> - 2016-01-11 15:22 +0000
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Stephen Wolstenholme <steve@easynn.com> - 2016-01-11 15:54 +0000
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-01-11 14:14 -0500
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-11 11:52 -0800
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-01-12 07:03 +1100
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-01-11 22:28 +0000
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-01-12 10:34 +1100
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-01-11 17:59 -0800
Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-01-12 02:52 +0000
Page 4 of 20 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 … 20 Next page →
| From | Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-01 21:36 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <dha1e0FfseU15@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #158452 |
On Mon, 01 Feb 2016 19:56:05 +1100, jack wrote: >> It doesn't handle the 'senior' case, true. But it does the rest. > > No it doesn’t. It doesn’t handle the other situation where there is a > fixed charge to go anywhere in the day, week or month but only charges > you for the actual cost of the particular trip when that is less than > the fixed charge that allows you to go anywhere as often as you like. It does, for the day anyway (as I noted before). Fixed (lowish) charge for a journey. Capped cost per day at less than the amount for three journeys. Nothing to stop you taking 100 journeys and you still only pay up to the cap. -- Using UNIX since v6 (1975)... Use the BIG mirror service in the UK: http://www.mirrorservice.org
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-02 10:00 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <dha6brFu607U1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #158545 |
"Bob Eager" <news0006@eager.cx> wrote in message news:dha1e0FfseU15@mid.individual.net... > On Mon, 01 Feb 2016 19:56:05 +1100, jack wrote: > >>> It doesn't handle the 'senior' case, true. But it does the rest. >> >> No it doesn’t. It doesn’t handle the other situation where there is a >> fixed charge to go anywhere in the day, week or month but only charges >> you for the actual cost of the particular trip when that is less than >> the fixed charge that allows you to go anywhere as often as you like. > > It does, for the day anyway (as I noted before). Fixed (lowish) charge > for a journey. Capped cost per day at less than the amount for three > journeys. Nothing to stop you taking 100 journeys and you still only pay > up to the cap. Not possible to do that unless you use the same card all the time and still doesn’t handle the weekly and monthly and quarterly etc season tickets either.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-02 00:39 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <dhac5hFfseU18@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #158563 |
On Tue, 02 Feb 2016 10:00:08 +1100, jack wrote: > "Bob Eager" <news0006@eager.cx> wrote in message > news:dha1e0FfseU15@mid.individual.net... >> On Mon, 01 Feb 2016 19:56:05 +1100, jack wrote: >> >>>> It doesn't handle the 'senior' case, true. But it does the rest. >>> >>> No it doesn’t. It doesn’t handle the other situation where there is a >>> fixed charge to go anywhere in the day, week or month but only charges >>> you for the actual cost of the particular trip when that is less than >>> the fixed charge that allows you to go anywhere as often as you like. >> >> It does, for the day anyway (as I noted before). Fixed (lowish) charge >> for a journey. Capped cost per day at less than the amount for three >> journeys. Nothing to stop you taking 100 journeys and you still only >> pay up to the cap. > > Not possible to do that unless you use the same card all the time and > still doesn’t handle the weekly and monthly and quarterly etc season > tickets either. I specified all that. It may be limited but it works for days. And on any given day, why wouldn't you use the same card? -- Using UNIX since v6 (1975)... Use the BIG mirror service in the UK: http://www.mirrorservice.org
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-02 13:01 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <dhagv4F21hqU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #158576 |
"Bob Eager" <news0006@eager.cx> wrote in message news:dhac5hFfseU18@mid.individual.net... > On Tue, 02 Feb 2016 10:00:08 +1100, jack wrote: > >> "Bob Eager" <news0006@eager.cx> wrote in message >> news:dha1e0FfseU15@mid.individual.net... >>> On Mon, 01 Feb 2016 19:56:05 +1100, jack wrote: >>> >>>>> It doesn't handle the 'senior' case, true. But it does the rest. >>>> >>>> No it doesn’t. It doesn’t handle the other situation where there is a >>>> fixed charge to go anywhere in the day, week or month but only charges >>>> you for the actual cost of the particular trip when that is less than >>>> the fixed charge that allows you to go anywhere as often as you like. >>> >>> It does, for the day anyway (as I noted before). Fixed (lowish) charge >>> for a journey. Capped cost per day at less than the amount for three >>> journeys. Nothing to stop you taking 100 journeys and you still only >>> pay up to the cap. >> >> Not possible to do that unless you use the same card all the time and >> still doesn’t handle the weekly and monthly and quarterly etc season >> tickets either. > > I specified all that. It may be limited but it works for days. And doesn’t work for season tickets which are a very important part of any public transport system. > And on any given day, why wouldn't you use the same card? Because you have run out of credit/balance on the one you first used.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-02 08:23 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <dhb7caFfseU19@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #158584 |
On Tue, 02 Feb 2016 13:01:04 +1100, jack wrote: > "Bob Eager" <news0006@eager.cx> wrote in message > news:dhac5hFfseU18@mid.individual.net... >> On Tue, 02 Feb 2016 10:00:08 +1100, jack wrote: >> >>> "Bob Eager" <news0006@eager.cx> wrote in message >>> news:dha1e0FfseU15@mid.individual.net... >>>> On Mon, 01 Feb 2016 19:56:05 +1100, jack wrote: >>>> >>>>>> It doesn't handle the 'senior' case, true. But it does the rest. >>>>> >>>>> No it doesn’t. It doesn’t handle the other situation where there is >>>>> a fixed charge to go anywhere in the day, week or month but only >>>>> charges you for the actual cost of the particular trip when that is >>>>> less than the fixed charge that allows you to go anywhere as often >>>>> as you like. >>>> >>>> It does, for the day anyway (as I noted before). Fixed (lowish) >>>> charge for a journey. Capped cost per day at less than the amount for >>>> three journeys. Nothing to stop you taking 100 journeys and you still >>>> only pay up to the cap. >>> >>> Not possible to do that unless you use the same card all the time and >>> still doesn’t handle the weekly and monthly and quarterly etc season >>> tickets either. >> >> I specified all that. It may be limited but it works for days. > > And doesn’t work for season tickets which are a very important part of > any public transport system. Season tickets are issued separately and are equally quick to process. Stick them in a slot, they pop out of another and that's that. You don't even really have to slow your walk. >> And on any given day, why wouldn't you use the same card? > > Because you have run out of credit/balance on the one you first used. This is my main bank debit card I'm talking about. -- Using UNIX since v6 (1975)... Use the BIG mirror service in the UK: http://www.mirrorservice.org
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-02 19:30 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <dhb7phF72ltU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #158601 |
"Bob Eager" <news0006@eager.cx> wrote in message news:dhb7caFfseU19@mid.individual.net... > On Tue, 02 Feb 2016 13:01:04 +1100, jack wrote: > >> "Bob Eager" <news0006@eager.cx> wrote in message >> news:dhac5hFfseU18@mid.individual.net... >>> On Tue, 02 Feb 2016 10:00:08 +1100, jack wrote: >>> >>>> "Bob Eager" <news0006@eager.cx> wrote in message >>>> news:dha1e0FfseU15@mid.individual.net... >>>>> On Mon, 01 Feb 2016 19:56:05 +1100, jack wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>> It doesn't handle the 'senior' case, true. But it does the rest. >>>>>> >>>>>> No it doesn’t. It doesn’t handle the other situation where there is >>>>>> a fixed charge to go anywhere in the day, week or month but only >>>>>> charges you for the actual cost of the particular trip when that is >>>>>> less than the fixed charge that allows you to go anywhere as often >>>>>> as you like. >>>>> >>>>> It does, for the day anyway (as I noted before). Fixed (lowish) >>>>> charge for a journey. Capped cost per day at less than the amount for >>>>> three journeys. Nothing to stop you taking 100 journeys and you still >>>>> only pay up to the cap. >>>> >>>> Not possible to do that unless you use the same card all the time and >>>> still doesn’t handle the weekly and monthly and quarterly etc season >>>> tickets either. >>> >>> I specified all that. It may be limited but it works for days. >> >> And doesn’t work for season tickets which are a very important part of >> any public transport system. > Season tickets are issued separately Makes a lot more sense to have the dedicated card handle everything. > and are equally quick to process. Stick them in > a slot, they pop out of another and that's that. > You don't even really have to slow your walk. But obviously needs a dedicates slot. Makes a lot more sense to have the one thing handle everything. >>> And on any given day, why wouldn't you use the same card? >> Because you have run out of credit/balance on the one you first used. > This is my main bank debit card I'm talking about. That isnt necessarily true for everyone. I do have one main bank debit card that I normally use, but it doesn’t always have a balance that can be used. I then use a different card when it doesn’t.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-02 09:18 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <dhbajnFfseU21@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #158603 |
On Tue, 02 Feb 2016 19:30:36 +1100, jack wrote: > > "Bob Eager" <news0006@eager.cx> wrote in message > news:dhb7caFfseU19@mid.individual.net... >> On Tue, 02 Feb 2016 13:01:04 +1100, jack wrote: >> >>> "Bob Eager" <news0006@eager.cx> wrote in message >>> news:dhac5hFfseU18@mid.individual.net... >>>> On Tue, 02 Feb 2016 10:00:08 +1100, jack wrote: >>>> >>>>> "Bob Eager" <news0006@eager.cx> wrote in message >>>>> news:dha1e0FfseU15@mid.individual.net... >>>>>> On Mon, 01 Feb 2016 19:56:05 +1100, jack wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>> It doesn't handle the 'senior' case, true. But it does the rest. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> No it doesn’t. It doesn’t handle the other situation where there >>>>>>> is a fixed charge to go anywhere in the day, week or month but >>>>>>> only charges you for the actual cost of the particular trip when >>>>>>> that is less than the fixed charge that allows you to go anywhere >>>>>>> as often as you like. >>>>>> >>>>>> It does, for the day anyway (as I noted before). Fixed (lowish) >>>>>> charge for a journey. Capped cost per day at less than the amount >>>>>> for three journeys. Nothing to stop you taking 100 journeys and you >>>>>> still only pay up to the cap. >>>>> >>>>> Not possible to do that unless you use the same card all the time >>>>> and still doesn’t handle the weekly and monthly and quarterly etc >>>>> season tickets either. >>>> >>>> I specified all that. It may be limited but it works for days. >>> >>> And doesn’t work for season tickets which are a very important part of >>> any public transport system. > >> Season tickets are issued separately > > Makes a lot more sense to have the dedicated card handle everything. > >> and are equally quick to process. Stick them in a slot, they pop out of >> another and that's that. >> You don't even really have to slow your walk. > > But obviously needs a dedicates slot. That is the same slot that's used for ordinary tickets. One slot, one touch sensor. -- Using UNIX since v6 (1975)... Use the BIG mirror service in the UK: http://www.mirrorservice.org
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-02 09:55 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <dhbcofF7o8mU5@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #158604 |
On 2016-02-02, Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> wrote:
> On Tue, 02 Feb 2016 19:30:36 +1100, jack wrote:
[44 lines snipped]
>> But obviously needs a dedicates slot.
>
> That is the same slot that's used for ordinary tickets. One slot, one
> touch sensor.
You realise you're arguing with a Speedo clone, don't you?
(P.S. Fuck off, Rod.)
--
Today is Pungenday, the 33rd day of Chaos in the YOLD 3182
I don't have an attitude problem.
If you have a problem with my attitude, that's your problem.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-02 12:19 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <dhbl60FfseU22@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #158606 |
On Tue, 02 Feb 2016 09:55:27 +0000, Huge wrote: > On 2016-02-02, Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> wrote: >> On Tue, 02 Feb 2016 19:30:36 +1100, jack wrote: > > [44 lines snipped] > >>> But obviously needs a dedicates slot. >> >> That is the same slot that's used for ordinary tickets. One slot, one >> touch sensor. > > You realise you're arguing with a Speedo clone, don't you? > > (P.S. Fuck off, Rod.) I was just beginning to wonder that. A bit slow at the moment...jury service is tiring! -- Using UNIX since v6 (1975)... Use the BIG mirror service in the UK: http://www.mirrorservice.org
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-02 16:54 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <dhc5ahFei0oU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #158610 |
On 2016-02-02, Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> wrote:
> On Tue, 02 Feb 2016 09:55:27 +0000, Huge wrote:
>
>> On 2016-02-02, Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> wrote:
>>> On Tue, 02 Feb 2016 19:30:36 +1100, jack wrote:
>>
>> [44 lines snipped]
>>
>>>> But obviously needs a dedicates slot.
>>>
>>> That is the same slot that's used for ordinary tickets. One slot, one
>>> touch sensor.
>>
>> You realise you're arguing with a Speedo clone, don't you?
>>
>> (P.S. Fuck off, Rod.)
>
> I was just beginning to wonder that. A bit slow at the moment...jury
> service is tiring!
Hope you're not posting from the jury room .... :o)
--
Today is Pungenday, the 33rd day of Chaos in the YOLD 3182
I don't have an attitude problem.
If you have a problem with my attitude, that's your problem.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-02 18:35 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <dhcb84FfseU25@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #158618 |
On Tue, 02 Feb 2016 16:54:41 +0000, Huge wrote: > On 2016-02-02, Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> wrote: >> On Tue, 02 Feb 2016 09:55:27 +0000, Huge wrote: >> >>> On 2016-02-02, Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> wrote: >>>> On Tue, 02 Feb 2016 19:30:36 +1100, jack wrote: >>> >>> [44 lines snipped] >>> >>>>> But obviously needs a dedicates slot. >>>> >>>> That is the same slot that's used for ordinary tickets. One slot, one >>>> touch sensor. >>> >>> You realise you're arguing with a Speedo clone, don't you? >>> >>> (P.S. Fuck off, Rod.) >> >> I was just beginning to wonder that. A bit slow at the moment...jury >> service is tiring! > > Hope you're not posting from the jury room .... :o) We were sent home for the day. -- Using UNIX since v6 (1975)... Use the BIG mirror service in the UK: http://www.mirrorservice.org
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-03 05:22 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <dhcafuFftifU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #158604 |
"Bob Eager" <news0006@eager.cx> wrote in message news:dhbajnFfseU21@mid.individual.net... > On Tue, 02 Feb 2016 19:30:36 +1100, jack wrote: > > >> >> "Bob Eager" <news0006@eager.cx> wrote in message >> news:dhb7caFfseU19@mid.individual.net... >>> On Tue, 02 Feb 2016 13:01:04 +1100, jack wrote: >>> >>>> "Bob Eager" <news0006@eager.cx> wrote in message >>>> news:dhac5hFfseU18@mid.individual.net... >>>>> On Tue, 02 Feb 2016 10:00:08 +1100, jack wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> "Bob Eager" <news0006@eager.cx> wrote in message >>>>>> news:dha1e0FfseU15@mid.individual.net... >>>>>>> On Mon, 01 Feb 2016 19:56:05 +1100, jack wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> It doesn't handle the 'senior' case, true. But it does the rest. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> No it doesn’t. It doesn’t handle the other situation where there >>>>>>>> is a fixed charge to go anywhere in the day, week or month but >>>>>>>> only charges you for the actual cost of the particular trip when >>>>>>>> that is less than the fixed charge that allows you to go anywhere >>>>>>>> as often as you like. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> It does, for the day anyway (as I noted before). Fixed (lowish) >>>>>>> charge for a journey. Capped cost per day at less than the amount >>>>>>> for three journeys. Nothing to stop you taking 100 journeys and you >>>>>>> still only pay up to the cap. >>>>>> >>>>>> Not possible to do that unless you use the same card all the time >>>>>> and still doesn’t handle the weekly and monthly and quarterly etc >>>>>> season tickets either. >>>>> >>>>> I specified all that. It may be limited but it works for days. >>>> >>>> And doesn’t work for season tickets which are a very important part of >>>> any public transport system. >> >>> Season tickets are issued separately >> >> Makes a lot more sense to have the dedicated card handle everything. >> >>> and are equally quick to process. Stick them in a slot, they pop out of >>> another and that's that. >>> You don't even really have to slow your walk. >> >> But obviously needs a dedicates slot. > > That is the same slot that's used for ordinary tickets. One slot, one > touch sensor. There are no tickets in the Sydney system, just the cards. Your system needs to handle both the tickets and the cards and needs ticket dispensing machines too.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-01 07:53 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <n8n2t706lt@news3.newsguy.com> |
| In reply to | #158386 |
On 2016-01-31, Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> wrote: > On Mon, 01 Feb 2016 04:54:41 +1100, jack wrote: > >> "Ahem A Rivet's Shot" <steveo@eircom.net> wrote in message >> news:20160131094248.39f4c0b282484fa720279fae@eircom.net... >> >>> On Sun, 31 Jan 2016 04:34:45 -0500 "J. Clarke" >>> <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>> The vending machines at work will take bills up to $20, but they give >>>> change in coins--put a 20 in and buy a soda and you'll get a hand full >>>> of dollar coins. >>> >>> The ticket machines for the Seattle transit system are like that as I >>> found when I arrived at SeaTac with nothing but large bills from an >>> ATM. >>> It takes a while to offload that much change when you're travelling on >>> expenses. >> >> Another good reason for the machines to take cards or the phone. > > In London, UK, the Underground (subway) will take a bank debit card waved > over a sensor on the gate. You wave it on entry, then again on exit. You > are then charged the correct amount. > > Simple and effective. They tried to do this on the buses here in Vancouver. As with any other IT project the provincial government has thrown tax dollars at, it turned out to be a total disaster. After pouring $200 million into the Compass card project, they finally conceded that they couldn't get reliability and response times into a workable range. Since they realized that the public wouldn't put up with always being charged the three-zone maximum fare regardless of how short their trip was, they punted and went to single-zone fares across the entire bus system, grumbling all the while about how much money they were losing on people who actually did travel across multiple zones. In other words, neither simple nor effective. But I suspect this has more to do with the incompetence of the provincial government than it has to do with the feasibility of such a scheme. -- /~\ cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid (Charlie Gibbs) \ / I'm really at ac.dekanfrus if you read it the right way. X Top-posted messages will probably be ignored. See RFC1855. / \ HTML will DEFINITELY be ignored. Join the ASCII ribbon campaign!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-01 20:01 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <dh8l7oFhgptU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #158448 |
"Charlie Gibbs" <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote in message news:n8n2t706lt@news3.newsguy.com... > On 2016-01-31, Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> wrote: > >> On Mon, 01 Feb 2016 04:54:41 +1100, jack wrote: >> >>> "Ahem A Rivet's Shot" <steveo@eircom.net> wrote in message >>> news:20160131094248.39f4c0b282484fa720279fae@eircom.net... >>> >>>> On Sun, 31 Jan 2016 04:34:45 -0500 "J. Clarke" >>>> <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> The vending machines at work will take bills up to $20, but they give >>>>> change in coins--put a 20 in and buy a soda and you'll get a hand full >>>>> of dollar coins. >>>> >>>> The ticket machines for the Seattle transit system are like that as I >>>> found when I arrived at SeaTac with nothing but large bills from an >>>> ATM. >>>> It takes a while to offload that much change when you're travelling on >>>> expenses. >>> >>> Another good reason for the machines to take cards or the phone. >> >> In London, UK, the Underground (subway) will take a bank debit card waved >> over a sensor on the gate. You wave it on entry, then again on exit. You >> are then charged the correct amount. >> >> Simple and effective. > > They tried to do this on the buses here in Vancouver. As with any other > IT project the provincial government has thrown tax dollars at, it turned > out to be a total disaster. After pouring $200 million into the Compass > card project, they finally conceded that they couldn't get reliability > and response times into a workable range. Since they realized that > the public wouldn't put up with always being charged the three-zone > maximum fare regardless of how short their trip was, they punted and > went to single-zone fares across the entire bus system, grumbling all > the while about how much money they were losing on people who actually > did travel across multiple zones. > > In other words, neither simple nor effective. But I suspect this has > more to do with the incompetence of the provincial government than it > has to do with the feasibility of such a scheme. Yeah, works fine in Sydney, on everything from heavy rail, light rail to buses and ferries. The only thing it doesn’t work on is aircraft and taxis but there are no govt aircraft anymore and never were any govt taxis. We've just seen Uber and AirBnB etc made legal too.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-01 11:02 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <D72dnTqEjf-_pjLLnZ2dnUU78UednZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #158448 |
On 01/02/2016 07:53, Charlie Gibbs wrote: > On 2016-01-31, Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> wrote: > >> On Mon, 01 Feb 2016 04:54:41 +1100, jack wrote: >> >>> "Ahem A Rivet's Shot" <steveo@eircom.net> wrote in message >>> news:20160131094248.39f4c0b282484fa720279fae@eircom.net... >>> >>>> On Sun, 31 Jan 2016 04:34:45 -0500 "J. Clarke" >>>> <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> The vending machines at work will take bills up to $20, but they give >>>>> change in coins--put a 20 in and buy a soda and you'll get a hand full >>>>> of dollar coins. >>>> >>>> The ticket machines for the Seattle transit system are like that as I >>>> found when I arrived at SeaTac with nothing but large bills from an >>>> ATM. >>>> It takes a while to offload that much change when you're travelling on >>>> expenses. >>> >>> Another good reason for the machines to take cards or the phone. >> >> In London, UK, the Underground (subway) will take a bank debit card waved >> over a sensor on the gate. You wave it on entry, then again on exit. You >> are then charged the correct amount. >> >> Simple and effective. > > They tried to do this on the buses here in Vancouver. As with any other > IT project the provincial government has thrown tax dollars at, it turned > out to be a total disaster. After pouring $200 million into the Compass > card project, they finally conceded that they couldn't get reliability > and response times into a workable range. Since they realized that > the public wouldn't put up with always being charged the three-zone > maximum fare regardless of how short their trip was, they punted and > went to single-zone fares across the entire bus system, grumbling all > the while about how much money they were losing on people who actually > did travel across multiple zones. > > In other words, neither simple nor effective. But I suspect this has > more to do with the incompetence of the provincial government than it > has to do with the feasibility of such a scheme. > Any pilot project where you cannot get all the project workers in a normal meeting room will fail. Simply because the project manager does not know what is going on if he does not talk to his workers.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-02 05:36 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <dh9mtpFq64mU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #158459 |
"Andrew Swallow" <am.swallow@btinternet.com> wrote in message news:D72dnTqEjf-_pjLLnZ2dnUU78UednZ2d@giganews.com... > On 01/02/2016 07:53, Charlie Gibbs wrote: >> On 2016-01-31, Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> wrote: >> >>> On Mon, 01 Feb 2016 04:54:41 +1100, jack wrote: >>> >>>> "Ahem A Rivet's Shot" <steveo@eircom.net> wrote in message >>>> news:20160131094248.39f4c0b282484fa720279fae@eircom.net... >>>> >>>>> On Sun, 31 Jan 2016 04:34:45 -0500 "J. Clarke" >>>>> <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> The vending machines at work will take bills up to $20, but they give >>>>>> change in coins--put a 20 in and buy a soda and you'll get a hand >>>>>> full >>>>>> of dollar coins. >>>>> >>>>> The ticket machines for the Seattle transit system are like that as I >>>>> found when I arrived at SeaTac with nothing but large bills from an >>>>> ATM. >>>>> It takes a while to offload that much change when you're travelling on >>>>> expenses. >>>> >>>> Another good reason for the machines to take cards or the phone. >>> >>> In London, UK, the Underground (subway) will take a bank debit card >>> waved >>> over a sensor on the gate. You wave it on entry, then again on exit. You >>> are then charged the correct amount. >>> >>> Simple and effective. >> >> They tried to do this on the buses here in Vancouver. As with any other >> IT project the provincial government has thrown tax dollars at, it turned >> out to be a total disaster. After pouring $200 million into the Compass >> card project, they finally conceded that they couldn't get reliability >> and response times into a workable range. Since they realized that >> the public wouldn't put up with always being charged the three-zone >> maximum fare regardless of how short their trip was, they punted and >> went to single-zone fares across the entire bus system, grumbling all >> the while about how much money they were losing on people who actually >> did travel across multiple zones. >> >> In other words, neither simple nor effective. But I suspect this has >> more to do with the incompetence of the provincial government than it >> has to do with the feasibility of such a scheme. >> > Any pilot project where you cannot get all the project workers in a normal > meeting room will fail. Simply because the project manager does not know > what is going on if he does not talk to his workers. Doesn’t explain why the public transport card worked fine in Sydney which couldn’t do that. And Sydney does in fact have multi zone fares, more than 3 in fact, and it handles mixed mode trips fine too, on all of buses, light rail, heavy rail and ferries. And is now completely ticketless, if you don’t have a card you can't travel anymore. And the cards are completely free too. The only thing they can't do is the tolls on roads, but that is because a card wont work in that situation because the system need to be able to see the thing in the car from a much greater distance than with the cards which you tap against the card reader.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-01 19:25 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <7JmdnZv5zeBjLTLLnZ2dnUU78cOdnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #158506 |
On 01/02/2016 18:36, jack wrote: > > > "Andrew Swallow" <am.swallow@btinternet.com> wrote in message > news:D72dnTqEjf-_pjLLnZ2dnUU78UednZ2d@giganews.com... >> On 01/02/2016 07:53, Charlie Gibbs wrote: >>> On 2016-01-31, Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> wrote: >>> >>>> On Mon, 01 Feb 2016 04:54:41 +1100, jack wrote: >>>> >>>>> "Ahem A Rivet's Shot" <steveo@eircom.net> wrote in message >>>>> news:20160131094248.39f4c0b282484fa720279fae@eircom.net... >>>>> >>>>>> On Sun, 31 Jan 2016 04:34:45 -0500 "J. Clarke" >>>>>> <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> The vending machines at work will take bills up to $20, but they >>>>>>> give >>>>>>> change in coins--put a 20 in and buy a soda and you'll get a hand >>>>>>> full >>>>>>> of dollar coins. >>>>>> >>>>>> The ticket machines for the Seattle transit system are like that as I >>>>>> found when I arrived at SeaTac with nothing but large bills from an >>>>>> ATM. >>>>>> It takes a while to offload that much change when you're >>>>>> travelling on >>>>>> expenses. >>>>> >>>>> Another good reason for the machines to take cards or the phone. >>>> >>>> In London, UK, the Underground (subway) will take a bank debit card >>>> waved >>>> over a sensor on the gate. You wave it on entry, then again on exit. >>>> You >>>> are then charged the correct amount. >>>> >>>> Simple and effective. >>> >>> They tried to do this on the buses here in Vancouver. As with any other >>> IT project the provincial government has thrown tax dollars at, it >>> turned >>> out to be a total disaster. After pouring $200 million into the Compass >>> card project, they finally conceded that they couldn't get reliability >>> and response times into a workable range. Since they realized that >>> the public wouldn't put up with always being charged the three-zone >>> maximum fare regardless of how short their trip was, they punted and >>> went to single-zone fares across the entire bus system, grumbling all >>> the while about how much money they were losing on people who actually >>> did travel across multiple zones. >>> >>> In other words, neither simple nor effective. But I suspect this has >>> more to do with the incompetence of the provincial government than it >>> has to do with the feasibility of such a scheme. >>> >> Any pilot project where you cannot get all the project workers in a >> normal meeting room will fail. Simply because the project manager does >> not know what is going on if he does not talk to his workers. > > Doesn’t explain why the public transport card worked fine in > Sydney which couldn’t do that. And Sydney does in fact have > multi zone fares, more than 3 in fact, and it handles mixed mode > trips fine too, on all of buses, light rail, heavy rail and ferries. > And is now completely ticketless, if you don’t have a card you > can't travel anymore. And the cards are completely free too. > > The only thing they can't do is the tolls on roads, but that is > because a card wont work in that situation because the system > need to be able to see the thing in the car from a much greater > distance than with the cards which you tap against the card > reader. Look carefully and you will probably find that they tested this on a handful of routes first. Only when the pilot worked did they apply it to all routes.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-02 09:27 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <dha4evFtmsvU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #158517 |
"Andrew Swallow" <am.swallow@btinternet.com> wrote in message news:7JmdnZv5zeBjLTLLnZ2dnUU78cOdnZ2d@giganews.com... > On 01/02/2016 18:36, jack wrote: >> >> >> "Andrew Swallow" <am.swallow@btinternet.com> wrote in message >> news:D72dnTqEjf-_pjLLnZ2dnUU78UednZ2d@giganews.com... >>> On 01/02/2016 07:53, Charlie Gibbs wrote: >>>> On 2016-01-31, Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> wrote: >>>> >>>>> On Mon, 01 Feb 2016 04:54:41 +1100, jack wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> "Ahem A Rivet's Shot" <steveo@eircom.net> wrote in message >>>>>> news:20160131094248.39f4c0b282484fa720279fae@eircom.net... >>>>>> >>>>>>> On Sun, 31 Jan 2016 04:34:45 -0500 "J. Clarke" >>>>>>> <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> The vending machines at work will take bills up to $20, but they >>>>>>>> give >>>>>>>> change in coins--put a 20 in and buy a soda and you'll get a hand >>>>>>>> full >>>>>>>> of dollar coins. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The ticket machines for the Seattle transit system are like that as >>>>>>> I >>>>>>> found when I arrived at SeaTac with nothing but large bills from an >>>>>>> ATM. >>>>>>> It takes a while to offload that much change when you're >>>>>>> travelling on >>>>>>> expenses. >>>>>> >>>>>> Another good reason for the machines to take cards or the phone. >>>>> >>>>> In London, UK, the Underground (subway) will take a bank debit card >>>>> waved >>>>> over a sensor on the gate. You wave it on entry, then again on exit. >>>>> You >>>>> are then charged the correct amount. >>>>> >>>>> Simple and effective. >>>> >>>> They tried to do this on the buses here in Vancouver. As with any >>>> other >>>> IT project the provincial government has thrown tax dollars at, it >>>> turned >>>> out to be a total disaster. After pouring $200 million into the >>>> Compass >>>> card project, they finally conceded that they couldn't get reliability >>>> and response times into a workable range. Since they realized that >>>> the public wouldn't put up with always being charged the three-zone >>>> maximum fare regardless of how short their trip was, they punted and >>>> went to single-zone fares across the entire bus system, grumbling all >>>> the while about how much money they were losing on people who actually >>>> did travel across multiple zones. >>>> >>>> In other words, neither simple nor effective. But I suspect this has >>>> more to do with the incompetence of the provincial government than it >>>> has to do with the feasibility of such a scheme. >>>> >>> Any pilot project where you cannot get all the project workers in a >>> normal meeting room will fail. Simply because the project manager does >>> not know what is going on if he does not talk to his workers. >> >> Doesn’t explain why the public transport card worked fine in >> Sydney which couldn’t do that. And Sydney does in fact have >> multi zone fares, more than 3 in fact, and it handles mixed mode >> trips fine too, on all of buses, light rail, heavy rail and ferries. >> And is now completely ticketless, if you don’t have a card you >> can't travel anymore. And the cards are completely free too. >> >> The only thing they can't do is the tolls on roads, but that is >> because a card wont work in that situation because the system >> need to be able to see the thing in the car from a much greater >> distance than with the cards which you tap against the card >> reader. > > Look carefully and you will probably find that they tested this on a > handful of routes first. Only when the pilot worked did they apply it to > all routes. I know they didn’t.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Mathias Koerber <mathias@koerber.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-02 12:45 +0800 |
| Message-ID | <dhaqk1F415fU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #158517 |
>> The only thing they can't do is the tolls on roads, but that is >> because a card wont work in that situation because the system >> need to be able to see the thing in the car from a much greater >> distance than with the cards which you tap against the card >> reader. ERP has worked in Singapore for years, with a reader that holds a cashcard (stored-value card).. Sure, you likely won't use the same card in the car and otherwise (too much hassle to insert or take out) but would be doable with accounts that can handle multiple linked cards etc
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-02 16:23 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <dhasq6F4hfdU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #158589 |
"Mathias Koerber" <mathias@koerber.org> wrote in message news:dhaqk1F415fU1@mid.individual.net... >> The only thing they can't do is the tolls on roads, but that is >> because a card wont work in that situation because the system >> needs to be able to see the thing in the car from a much greater >> distance than with the cards which you tap against the card reader. > ERP has worked in Singapore for years, with a > reader that holds a cashcard (stored-value card).. Ours is entirely cardless. You just register the thing that goes in the car. > Sure, you likely won't use the same card in the car > and otherwise (too much hassle to insert or take out) So it makes more sense to do it cardless. > but would be doable with accounts that > can handle multiple linked cards etc Yeah, that's how ours are done, no physical cards at all.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 4 of 20 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 … 20 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | alt.folklore.computers
csiph-web