News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
A Message to Our Readers
 9.4K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
EarthCam Time-Lapse Documents Rafael Viñoly-Designed New Stanford Hospital Construction
 40K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
Resort Town
 5.3K     0 

Coruscanti Cognoscente said:
Everyone on this board is so utterly against the subway extension to Sherway JUST BECAUSE IT'S "NEAR" Mississauga. Not because it goes to Mississauga. Because it's NEAR Mississauga. Dimwitted 416 trolls.
Click to expand...
Why are you deceiving us? Not everyone is against the Sherway expansion because it is "near" Mississauga. That statement is not true - why are you lying to us?

I'm against it because the last ridership forecast for this extension was only 700 riders in the peak hour. And while recent developments near Sherway may increase that somewhat - there's no way that it's even in LRT range, let alone subway!
 
The Mad Navigator said:
You make zero sense.
Click to expand...

On the contrary, he makes perfect sense. Anyone who truly supports the DRL (as I'm guessing you do, as it's in your display pic), should see that it needs to be built AHEAD of Transit City, or any other municipal transit expansion for that matter. The system is still largely centred around funneling people into downtown. The spout is at capacity. Therefore, you widen the spout first before you start widening the funnel (transit in the burbs) to increase ridership. If you don't, you're only making it more efficient for people travelling from the suburbs to reach a clusterf**k on the existing subway network (specifically the Yonge subway and Bloor-Yonge station).

It's pretty simple transit planning, but a lot of people seem to think that if we spend money on TC, the DRL will magically appear a short time later. It won't. DRL today, all other transit expansion tomorrow, not the other way around.

EDIT: DRL yesterday, all other transit expansion today. Needed to correct myself there.
 
Last edited:
nfitz said:
Why are you deceiving us? Not everyone is against the Sherway expansion because it is "near" Mississauga. That statement is not true - why are you lying to us?

I'm against it because the last ridership forecast for this extension was only 700 riders in the peak hour. And while recent developments near Sherway may increase that somewhat - there's no way that it's even in LRT range, let alone subway!
Click to expand...

Again, he's stating his opinion, he's not "deceiving" anybody. Just because his opinions differ from yours does make him deceitful or a liar...
 
gweed123 said:
Again, he's stating his opinion, he's not "deceiving" anybody. Just because his opinions differ from yours does make him deceitful or a liar...
Click to expand...
He isn't stating his opinions. He said "Everyone on this board is so utterly against the subway extension to Sherway JUST BECAUSE IT'S "NEAR" Mississauga." That is a statement of fact, not of opinion. And as such, it's proven wrong, if only one of the many people on this board are not utterly against the subway extension just because it's near Mississauga. As I stated my objection to this plan in post #2 in this thread solely because of low ridership, the statment is clearly 100% wrong. This makes the post either a deception or a lie - or I suppose provides light on his failure to read the thread before posting - but I really don't think this is the case, and I apologize if it is.
 
nfitz said:
He isn't stating his opinions. He said "Everyone on this board is so utterly against the subway extension to Sherway JUST BECAUSE IT'S "NEAR" Mississauga." That is a statement of fact, not of opinion. And as such, it's proven wrong, if only one of the many people on this board are not utterly against the subway extension just because it's near Mississauga. As I stated my objection to this plan in post #2 in this thread solely because of low ridership, the statment is clearly 100% wrong. This makes the post either a deception or a lie - or I suppose provides light on his failure to read the thread before posting - but I really don't think this is the case, and I apologize if it is.
Click to expand...

Ironic that YOU should claim other people are lying and deceiving when you purposefully misinterpret what people say to suit your purposes. I'd say that's more lying and deceitful than anything I've said. Remember the whole Lawrence East argument? Perfect example of your lies and deceit.
 
Coruscanti Cognoscente said:
Ironic that YOU should claim other people are lying and deceiving when you purposefully misinterpret what people say to suit your purposes. I'd say that's more lying and deceitful than anything I've said. Remember the whole Lawrence East argument? Perfect example of your lies and deceit.
Click to expand...
I have never done any such thing? I've made it quite clear that if I have said something that wasn't correct, that I would retract it and apologize. Point me to the post in question. It's far more likely I wasn't clear with what I said.

And quite frankly I don't recall the Lawrence East argument ... URL please.

I have never purposefully misinterpreted anything here ... except for the occasional very obvious punchline - never for deceit. I strongly object to your disgraceful lie!
 
nfitz said:
I have never done any such thing? I've made it quite clear that if I have said something that wasn't correct, that I would retract it and apologize. Point me to the post in question. It's far more likely I wasn't clear with what I said.

And quite frankly I don't recall the Lawrence East argument ... URL please.

I have never purposefully misinterpreted anything here ... except for the occasional very obvious punchline - never for deceit. I strongly object to your disgraceful lie!
Click to expand...

I thought the Lawrence East argument was with you. I could be wrong. It was one of you LRTistas. You're all the same to me anyway.

One of you claimed there'd be no Lawrence East station in SOS's plan. When there clearly is, just at a different location. That's just total obfuscation.

As for lies and deceit, I'm very tired of you saying that in every single post. It's getting tiring. Hence why I don't come into the transportation forum much anymore. There isn't any actual debate anymore. It's just endless battles in a neverending and unwinnable war.
 
Coruscanti Cognoscente said:
I thought the Lawrence East argument was with you. I could be wrong. It was one of you LRTistas. You're all the same to me anyway.
Click to expand...
What the heck is an LRTista? Given I've advocated subway expansion, then I guess an LRTista is someone who advocates subway expansion?

Coruscanti Cognoscente said:
One of you claimed there'd be no Lawrence East station in SOS's plan. When there clearly is, just at a different location. That's just total obfuscation.
Click to expand...
I was quite clear in that debate. Someone was claiming that the people who used the current Lawrence East station would be serviced by a new subway station 2 km away. I was quite clear that they wouldn't.

Coruscanti Cognoscente said:
As for lies and deceit, I'm very tired of you saying that in every single post.
Click to expand...
Your statement is another lie. I have not said that in every single post ... I haven't even said that in every single post today. Perhaps I say it in response to many of your posts ... and perhaps that says something about the mistruths you post.
 
nfitz said:
What the heck is an LRTista? Given I've advocated subway expansion, then I guess an LRTista is someone who advocates subway expansion?
Click to expand...

Show me one subway you support other than the mythical DRL

I was quite clear in that debate. Someone was claiming that the people who used the current Lawrence East station would be serviced by a new subway station 2 km away. I was quite clear that they wouldn't.
Click to expand...

There you go lying again. No one ever said "the" Lawrence East station would remain, just "a" Lawrence East. You know that and you purposely obfuscated the truth for your own misinformation purposes.

Your statement is another lie. I have not said that in every single post ... I haven't even said that in every single post today. Perhaps I say it in response to many of your posts ... and perhaps that says something about the mistruths you post.
Click to expand...

Two of us can play this lying game. Everything you say is clearly a lie. Just because you say everything I say is a lie doesn't make it the truth.
 
GenerationW said:
"Fast-tracking" a project already planned, funded, and under construction? Is he for real??
Click to expand...

Sadly yes. However the only thing I agree with him on is extending the B-D subway to STC. Make the STC the transfer point for the propose Scarborough LRT and the B-D Subway, it makes sense.
 
gweed123 said:
On the contrary, he makes perfect sense. Anyone who truly supports the DRL (as I'm guessing you do, as it's in your display pic), should see that it needs to be built AHEAD of Transit City, or any other municipal transit expansion for that matter. The system is still largely centred around funneling people into downtown. The spout is at capacity. Therefore, you widen the spout first before you start widening the funnel (transit in the burbs) to increase ridership. If you don't, you're only making it more efficient for people travelling from the suburbs to reach a clusterf**k on the existing subway network (specifically the Yonge subway and Bloor-Yonge station).

It's pretty simple transit planning, but a lot of people seem to think that if we spend money on TC, the DRL will magically appear a short time later. It won't. DRL today, all other transit expansion tomorrow, not the other way around.

EDIT: DRL yesterday, all other transit expansion today. Needed to correct myself there.
Click to expand...

You are very much correct.

However, such a scheme is not politically popular in the system we have now. Mayor candidates aren't going to get the required votes from suburbanites by putting DRL ahead of suburban extensions.
 
nfitz said:
Why are you deceiving us? Not everyone is against the Sherway expansion because it is "near" Mississauga. That statement is not true - why are you lying to us?

I'm against it because the last ridership forecast for this extension was only 700 riders in the peak hour. And while recent developments near Sherway may increase that somewhat - there's no way that it's even in LRT range, let alone subway!
Click to expand...

You really need to get off this "why are you trying to decieve us" shtick, makes you sound like a broken record. Sherway extension would have as high a usage as Kipling Stn if several bus routes were to be redirected to Sherway Gardens instead. Not to mention many thousands of daily walk-ins.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top