CTA Tattler

I swear rhat the red line run I end up on in the morning (a lot of the time) is run 522, and it is not a purple line.

Someone needs to ask the idiots at Chicago L.org why the put the registered mark every time they use the term "CTA"?
Totally unnecessary & stupid!
At the most, all they have to do is put the words "All names & trademarks are property of their respective owners" at the bottom of the page or some similar legal bullshit!

Wow. All the information, all the photos, all the cool stuff on that web site, and THAT'S what you harp about? Talk about looking for something to nitpick...

Unindicted -
Wow. Way to nitpick!

I bet the hard worker behind this great resource only put the registered mark in so often because he was told how strongly the CTA protects its marks.

This is the most comprehensive historical CTA site around - bar none. If you don't like it - then don't visit it.

I encourage everyone interested in history to go check it out.

Unindicted Co-Conspirator just jumped the shark, leapfrogging KevinB for unwarranted crankiness and criticism in the process. Wow.

Personally, I think that Mr. Garfield does an excellent job with that website. It is a literal treasure trove of information on the history of the "L". The CTA must think highly of him, since he wrote the text of the plaque at the Damen station on the Pink Line.

I'm with you Unindicted. Why, look at this:

"Those runs whose first in-service trip begins at Cottage Grove-East 63rd (on the former Jackson Park branch) simply "run lite" (with no passengers) from Ashland to East 63rd. At the same time, Yellow Line (Skokie Swift) numbers were revised slightly. Although they were still numbered in the 500s, they were given the last ten digits, numbered in the 590s to avoid all conflict with Evanston runs (whose number of runs in a day never reaches that high)."

First of all, they spelled it "l-i-t-e" when everyone knows it's "light". THEN, if that weren't bad enough they spelled out the word "ten" when obviously the number 10 should be used because any number higher than nine should printed in numeral form in a sentence.

This discredits EVERYTHING on that site for me! How can they be trusted to provide information after crap like THAT!!!

Hey, I resent that. My crankiness is never unwarranted. Unwelcome maybe, uncannily accurate, definitely, but never unwarranted.

KevinB

Cobalt, I can't tell if you're being sarcastic or not. I sort of hope so.

"Lite" is spelled that way because it's spelled that way on the CTA internal schedules (most likely to save room on a very crowded sheet of paper). It's shorthand used by CTA employees, so technically it's correct. It being put in quoutes as written on the page -- "run lite" -- was probably to show that it's an unusual, non-standard spelling.

It doesn't matter how hard the weasels at the CTA protect their trademarks.
Not even Microsoft & Disney have gone after anyone that's simply reporting on their companies.
The "R" in a circle serves no purpose on the site & it certainly isn't needed 20 or more times on a page!
Once would done the purpose.
It looks & is absurd!

Yes, Bill Saver -
Cobalt was clearly mocking Un-In-Co for not knowing or accepting the use of CTA jargon - AND - making the point that it is petty to pick on style usage (ten vs. 10), when the content is far superior to what can be found elsewhere.

I think we may have to classify Un-In-Co as a troll.

Oooohhh, someone's got their panties all bunched up.
There's no legal reason for Chicago L Org to put the registered sybol anywhere on the page.
They aren't using it for profit.
It's called the "Fair Use Doctrine" of copyright & trademark law.
Currently the Electronic freedom Foundation & others are challenging Oregon's claim that their state laws are copyrighted & may not be published anywhere else online.
I also note that CTA Tattler isn't CTA ® Tattler.[I hope the "R" in a circle works here]
And me wanting to label anyone he/she disagrees with a troll makes you a troll.

Maybe he's careful/fastidious about it since he works for the CTA?

Unindicted has made a fair point about something that bugs me too.

A lot of people seem not to realize that as private individuals without any employment or contractual relationship with a given company, we have NO obligation to use the name marketers have given their product or service--whether it be what to call a sports stadium or a railroad station [see, not entirely off-topic!], or spouting legal BS like "please hand me a Kleenex brand facial tissue."

Even journalists, it seems to me, are obligated only to avoid making misstatements of factual matters in news stories. They aren't extensions of anyone else's legal department, and their own lawyers should slap down any attempt to use them as such. And when it comes to opinion columns, the more creative the better, as in what John Kass puts between the parentheses to describe where certain politicians are coming from!

On the subject of occupational jargon, it's often reflective of a power struggle between insiders and outsiders. Company management should always consider how it affects their relationship with the public and encourage use of plain English in customer communications. Unless, of course, a piece of jargon describes something so much better than any other term, in which case they should simply tell everyone what it means so it can pass into general use.

Seriously, we're in a pissing match about this? Really?

Yes, Bill Saver, I was being sarcastic. Although your explanation was equally as funny as the original gripe by Unindicted. Leaving off one letter to save space on a "crowded sheet of paper"??? LOL

"Guys, do you know how many trees we can save if we spell it with four letters instead of five? - l-i-t-e instead of l-i-g-h-t?"

"Yeah! And instead of spelling it s-u-b-w-a-y, let's just call it the 'sub', as in Red Line sub. Then we'll REALLY save space."

Thank you C C Writer for understanding that the reason there are books on style [Fowler's, Chicago Manual, etc.] is that a bad writing style makes for difficult reading, which is what all those unnecessary ®'s do!
As you wrote, I'm not obligated to say "CTA, registered trademark" when I talk about it.
I still call it the Howard L line, the O'Hare L, Lake St. L and so on & I will continue to do so.
In fact if you read the legal notices for the so-called Brown Line's reconstruction, you would discover that the CTA itself, still refers to it as the Ravenswood L.

Chicago-L.org is actually run by Graham Garfield, who is an employee of the CTA.

I'm guessing he knows more about what CTA desires to have posted on rail-fan websites than most of you do, so HTFU.

Just because the CTA desires the ® symbol, doesn't mean he is required or forced to use it.

Seriously, shut up! This is the stupidest complaint ever..

Is Transit User a trademark lawyer who's upset that we spilled the beans about what they can't make us do and say?

No, it's just a retarded fuckin complaint.