"Go back to your seats, or lose them"...

[chakk]

I have experienced very busy trips on the eastbound CZ in Colorado where every coach seat was occupied and persons boarding at Glenwood Springs had to be seated in the lounge car for some time. It could be something as simple as a coach baggage car being substitited into the consist at last minute in Emeryville for a bad-ordered full coach, meaning about 20 fewer seats in the consist than what might have been expected -- and tickets sold for.

 

[Green Maned Lion]

I'm not claiming that there's NEVER a good reason to lie. Just that there's a cost to it.

There is indeed never a good reason to lie. Period.

Proverbs 12:22 "Lying lips are abomination to the Lord: but they that deal truly are his delight"

.

You are absolutely wrong. There are a lot of good reasons to lie, and even better ones for general obfuscation. That includes public safety, protection of the emotionally delicate, and confidence of the general public to prevent pointless fear. And those are just good reasons for benevolent purposes. There are tons of good reasons to lie if you don't have beneficence in your heart. And I consider the above point to be beyond debate.

The debate is whether it is right to lie, not whether there are good reasons for it.

And I further think that far too many people fail at one of my mantras far too often on here: never attribute to malice what can be readily explained by stupidity.

I am sure the conductor did not do this to simply make his job easier. Train pax, by and large, are not sheep. They ask whiney questions, they argue, they complain, and they file negative trip reports with Amtrak. Choosing to perform this action almost certainly came with a solid amount of aggravation and flack- not to mention questioning of his authority. The conductor had a reason, whatever it may be, to justify this tzuris to himself. Or he made a stupid decision.

 

[A Voice]

I'm not claiming that there's NEVER a good reason to lie. Just that there's a cost to it.

There is indeed never a good reason to lie. Period.

Proverbs 12:22 "Lying lips are abomination to the Lord: but they that deal truly are his delight"

.

You are absolutely wrong. There are a lot of good reasons to lie, and even better ones for general obfuscation. That includes public safety, protection of the emotionally delicate, and confidence of the general public to prevent pointless fear. And those are just good reasons for benevolent purposes. There are tons of good reasons to lie if you don't have beneficence in your heart. And I consider the above point to be beyond debate.

I didn't say it - the Lord God did. It is literally His words. I'm sure you didn't mean to, but what you're saying is that God is wrong.

 

[Ryan]

Protip: Not everyone shares your beliefs.

Protip: Even those of us that do don’t agree on the inerrancy of the Bible.

 

[Devil's Advocate]

I'm not claiming that there's NEVER a good reason to lie. Just that there's a cost to it.

There is indeed never a good reason to lie. Period.

Proverbs 12:22 "Lying lips are abomination to the Lord: but they that deal truly are his delight"

.

You are absolutely wrong. There are a lot of good reasons to lie, and even better ones for general obfuscation. That includes public safety, protection of the emotionally delicate, and confidence of the general public to prevent pointless fear. And those are just good reasons for benevolent purposes. There are tons of good reasons to lie if you don't have beneficence in your heart. And I consider the above point to be beyond debate.

I didn't say it - the Lord God did. It is literally His words. I'm sure you didn't mean to, but what you're saying is that God is wrong.

I'm sure you didn't mean to, but what you're saying is that GML is correct. If people like him are too honest people like you get offended.

 

[A Voice]

I will be glad to discuss such things with any of you over private message or elsewhere, but I'm not going to derail the thread further.

I can assure you, however, no offense was taken by me. Just standing up for the truth.

 

[JoeBas]

I can assure you, however, no offense was taken by me. Just standing up for the truth.

Please do tell your wife that yes, those pants DO make her butt look big.

Then get back to us on how that worked out for you.

 

[caravanman]

Funny how these threads wind their way hither and thither...

If one tells a lie, one is robbing the person who hears it. One is robbing them of the opportunity to evaluate and behave as they might with the truth, but instead to do your bidding.

I would be surprised if I have travelled less than 50,000 Amtrak miles, but have never heard the "go back to your seat" unlimatum before, most others in the lounge looked annoyed too. No matter.

Don't get me started about the non existing god(s)...

Ed.

 

[Triley]

So I just want to ask those saying never to lie... When we have a fatality, do you want us to (ignore Amtrak's rules in the process) and get on the PA and flat out say we struck and killed a trespasser? What if someone doesn't want the details of that? What about the children onboard? "Police activity" it what it is called for a reason.

Green Manned Lion was spot on...

 

[MikefromCrete]

So I just want to ask those saying never to lie... When we have a fatality, do you want us to (ignore Amtrak's rules in the process) and get on the PA and flat out say we struck and killed a trespasser? What if someone doesn't want the details of that? What about the children onboard? "Police activity" it what it is called for a reason.

Green Manned Lion was spot on...

I see no reason to hid the reasons for an unexpected stop. I've twice been on a train that ended up killing trespassers. No one made an announcement on the P.A., but the word got around. On one occasion, I was on the Broadway Limited heading through Indiana when we struck a person who had jumped off a bridge right in front of the train. After the sudden stop, police and emergency vehicles started showing up and anyone aware of anything got the idea. Word spread throughout the train.

On the other occasion, I was on a Metra Electric commuter train when we hit a trespasser on the tracks around 35th Street where the trains are going at a good clip since there are no intermediate stations. This was a really hard stop and we sat there for a few minutes when the emergency crews arrived. The conductor went through the train explaining the situation. We sat for several hours while the emergency crews did their work and the train crew had to be replaced in order to be drug tested. Again, anybody who wanted to know anything found out. There was no mass hysteria. Everybody was pretty quiet. We were all affected by this and wondered why a young woman had chosen to end her life this way, but life went on. A crew from the nearby 18th street shops took the train to University Park.

Again, these things are unfortunate, but there's no real reason to hide the truth: there's been a fatality. No need for grissly details and no need to make a P.A. announcement, but quietly telling those who want to know what happened never hurts.

 

[A Voice]

"Police activity" it what it is called for a reason.

And "police activity" is not a lie in the case of a trespasser strike, so long as law enforcement are actually involved (which they must be). Being honest does not require giving all the (often inappropriate) details.

 

[Railroad Bill]

Back to closer on topic, I can see a situation where there might be additional people boarding a train that were not expected. (case in point, recent Capitol Ltd delays that instigated putting Cleveland CL passengers onto the Lake Shore to get them to CHI on time. I am sure the conductor wanted to make sure he had seats in coach for these unexpected people. ) Of course there were not likely to be many people in the SSL at 3am . But there could be a similar circumstance where a double check of seat availability might be necessary.

The particular situation that Ed describes does sound a bit suspicious

 

[Triley]

"Police activity" it what it is called for a reason.

And "police activity" is not a lie in the case of a trespasser strike, so long as law enforcement are actually involved (which they must be). Being honest does not require giving all the (often inappropriate) details.

And when you get up in my face because you want to know what's taking so long, what sort of police activity, etc? As was stated, passengers get nosey and just keep asking questions. I am not allowed to come out and say "fatality".

 

[Devil's Advocate]

Funny how these threads wind their way hither and thither... If one tells a lie, one is robbing the person who hears it. One is robbing them of the opportunity to evaluate and behave as they might with the truth, but instead to do your bidding. I would be surprised if I have travelled less than 5a0,000 Amtrak miles, but have never heard the "go back to your seat" unlimatum before, most others in the lounge looked annoyed too. No matter. Don't get me started about the non existing god(s)... Ed.

I've never heard this particular ultimatum either but I'd be tempted to report it if I did, not because I'd expect any particular remuneration, but simply to get this activity onto someone's radar. Perhaps it was necessary and unavoidable, which would presumably be discovered by even minimal research on Amtrak's end, but it also might just be a lazy or overbearing reaction to sloppy record keeping. In which case a few reports that all turned out to come from the same conductor and/or coach attendant might indicate a need for more retraining on when to act and how to convey the message.

"Police activity" it what it is called for a reason.

And "police activity" is not a lie in the case of a trespasser strike, so long as law enforcement are actually involved (which they must be). Being honest does not require giving all the (often inappropriate) details.

What you're describing is a lie of omission. What you're betraying is blind adherence to moral absolutism. In a previous post you criticized others for not showing enough respect to a man who has made a career of going out of his way to act profoundly disrespectful and never showing any remorse or contrition for his actions regardless of the outcome. In fact he seems to be doing everything he can to drive as many wedges into as many rifts as possible and turn everyone against each other. I'm not sure where your foundation for moral proselytizing comes from but it doesn't appear to be based on practicing what you preach.

 

[PVD]

Hi, we are from the *****, are you hiding anyone from us we would like to send to a concentration camp? Yes there certainly are lies that are justified.

Sola scriptura just doesn't always cut it.

 

[caravanman]

Strange that the subject of "fatalities" should crop up... I am still writing my trip reports, but on my recent tour, the last section was Chicago to Boston, on the LSL. We were about 6 hours late anyway, and were then told that the train would be terminating just before Boston due to a fatality ahead. We detrained at a non Amtrak halt, and were taken by bus the last few miles. Strange to be walking around Boston at 3 am instead of 9pm, but as someone remarked, "we are having a bad time, but not as bad as the poor guy on the track..."

Of course with any rule there will be exceptions, but truth and facts tend to be more use to most folks, but then I could be misleading you...

Ed.

PS Thanks to whoever corrected my headline spelling error!

 

[Cho Cho Charlie]

It is not about democracy, simply the first time I have heard such an ultimatum about loosing my own reserved and paid for seat, if it was not occupied? Most folk would expect some details. I guess sheep would just follow orders though...

You had your "own reserved and paid for seat"?

I never had a seat that was reserved. And once on an overbooked NER, I didn't even have a seat.

 

[crescent-zephyr]

Amtrak uses the term reserved so I don't see why an Amtrak passenger can't also use the term.

 

[caravanman]

Let's just say I paid Amtrak to ride on their "All Reseved Seats Only" train, and boarded holding a ticket to that effect.

Ed.

 

[Hal]

"Police activity" it what it is called for a reason.

And "police activity" is not a lie in the case of a trespasser strike, so long as law enforcement are actually involved (which they must be). Being honest does not require giving all the (often inappropriate) details.

And when you get up in my face because you want to know what's taking so long, what sort of police activity, etc? As was stated, passengers get nosey and just keep asking questions. I am not allowed to come out and say "fatality".

I would always tell them if they asked. That is different than announcing on the PA. While some operating crew would be on the ground when there is an incident always leave crew on the train. They should walk through and answer questions. The LSA should answer questions. They can say that the train hit someone. They can say the train can't move until the coroner arrives and releases the train. It is a crime scene.

Passengers are not stupid. Sooner or later some will guess what police activity means.

 

[Hal]

On one of my recent Amtrak long distance train rides, the Conductor announced at mid point that folk sitting in the sightseeing lounge car should return to their assigned seats. If they did not, their assigned seats would be given to other passengers boarding at the next stop.

No explanation for this was given, just the bare announcement, which was repeated more than once.

Given that passengers are supposed to have a seat reservation, how do they overbook the train?

Apart from the annoyance of giving up a good view, the "take it or leave it" attitude of the Conductor was not appreciated.

Ed.

Passengers don't have a seat reservation. They have a train reservation. As far as overbooking. Everything except First Class, Sleepers and Business Class is overbooked. The percentage varies per train. It is supposed to work out that overbooking is figured out correct and the no shows mean everyone has a seat. But sometimes it doesn't. Sometimes everyone shows. Often on trains the overflow is in the lounge car. Those are non rev seats and not counted in the capacity.
So the conductor knows the rev capacity of the train. On the conductors EMD is the number of tickets lifted. Then the conductor often checks the next few stops ahead for passengers boarding and sees that there will be more passengers than revenue seats. (most conductors can do the math) So the excess is going to be seated in the non revenue seats. So passengers may not be able to occupy a non rev seat in a lounge and keep their rev seat at the same time. They will need to give up one or the other.

I doubt that the conductor cared about lounge hogs.

 

[jis]

Thank you! I was hoping that you'd come on at some point and give the real explanation. I suspected as much but had no first hand knowledge to base the suspicion on.

I have indeed had the pleasure of occupying a non-rev seat upon joining an oversold train en route.

I do tend to agree with GML's and DA's positions on matters mentioned in this thread but unrelated to the main subject of this thread.

 

[user 6862]

Hal, great explanation and it's now clear how this works, it begs a question / conclusion though.

If you are travelling in Coach, what happened to Ed can happen at any time but probably not often. If in Sleeper / First Class this won't happen as your seat or compartment is reserved specifically for you. Would it be a good idea in future for anyone travelling coach on an LD train to leave something personal but non valuable on your seat when you leave it as that should deter a newcomer from just taking it?

 

[jis]

The bottom line is that when a train is oversold a situation may arise where you either get to occupy a non-rev seat or a rev seat, but not both. If you like the non-rev seat then you have to give up your rev seat under those circumstances. It is not a question of merely marking your rev seat as occupied and not actually using it while occupying a non-rev seat.

Naturally, it is always a good idea to clearly mark your seat as occupied using something of relatively low value when going to the toilet or diner or some such anyway.

 

[Green Maned Lion]

I didn't say it - the Lord God did. It is literally His words. I'm sure you didn't mean to, but what you're saying is that God is wrong.

First of all I specifically said that whether it is right to lie is different than whether there are good reasons to do it. I can think of several of the Ten Commandments that, under various circumstances, there are good reasons for violating them. Second, under my beliefs, only the first five books of the Old Testament (the Torah) are the words of God himself. The Writings, of which proverbs is a part, are an addenda added by man, in my opinion. Also a basically held opinion of many Hebrew scholars. There really are very few provable facts when it comes to anything religious- although one fact I will tell you is most if not all English translations of the Old Testament are fast, loose, and often dead wrong in basic spirit. I have not accused my perception of God of being wrong.

I am not disrespecting or questioning your beliefs- they are no more or less provable than mine. But I do ask you don't demand that I hold opinions on secular issues based on your religious beliefs.

Furthermore, it is extremely unreasonable to make an absolute statement (There is never a good reason to lie) and then back away from it by softening the definition of the word. That is how we lose the ability to communicate. Lieing is the attempt to modify data told somebody with the intent of withholding the nature of reality from them. This can be done by concocting factually inaccurate substitute information, or it can be done by withholding information with the intent to make the listener believe they have the full gist of the story.

Either one can be argued to be wrong to do, and I can think of good reasons to do either.

I'm sure you didn't mean to, but what you're saying is that GML is correct. If people like him are too honest people like you get offended.

And may we all say: Amen!