From: ahk@chinet.com   
      
   Stephen Sprunk  wrote:   
   >On 13-Aug-14 22:56, Adam H. Kerman wrote:   
   >>Stephen Sprunk  wrote:   
   >>>On 12-Aug-14 21:40, John Levine wrote:   
      
   >>>>That's not totally foolish.  The new trains will run 4 tph, more   
   >>>>like transit, while the existing trains run on a typical   
   >>>>commuter schedule.   
      
   >>>Nit: commuter rail is a subset of transit.  Perhaps you meant   
   >>>light and/or heavy rail?   
      
   >>You're doing your refusal to read for context thing. In context,   
   >>"commuter railroad" is a passenger railroad service that's part of   
   >>the general system of railroad transportation (or whatever it's   
   >>called in Canadian law) and transit rail is passenger railroad   
   >>service that is not.   
      
   >That makes no sense.   
      
   Things don't make sense to you when you refuse to read for context,   
   do they, Stephen.   
      
   >Commuter rail is a subset of transit, so transit rail cannot exclude   
   >commuter rail.  It's simple logic.   
      
   The word "transit" was not being used in the way you claim it was being   
   used, which is perfectly clear to everyone else. You refuse to understand   
   how the word was used as you won't read for context. The problem is yours,   
   Stephen, not Levine's.   
      
   --- SoupGate/W32 v1.03   
    * Origin: LiveWire BBS -=*=- UseNet FTN Gateway (1:2320/1)