People on this forum are helpful with general, "sensible" splitting and telling people what route their ticket is valid on.
Indeed.
They don't disclose major "loopholes" in the Routeing Guide!
In general that is correct.
(And if they did I'm sure the Moderators would be quick to remove it!)
I'm not so sure about that! I don't really see it as a moderating decision (but, really this is going ridiculously off-topic). I will sometimes PM people, the OP warning them that the guard may not accept the ticket and to expect a 'discussion' with the guard/RPIs if they use it (
many people do
not want the hassle. I would not book tickets for family members that I may use myself as they don't want an argument and have to ask the guard to look up the NRCoC/RG!) and to the OP advising that there may be issues with the advice.
If it's
incorrect (or even partially incorrect) I have no qualms removing it, to avoid confusion. Sometimes this is not done because people have already quoted it and stated it is incorrect and this has been done in a sensible meaningful way meaning that intervention is not required.
I do not recommend people use routes that a guard is likely to report to ATOC to get it removed. I may, however, PM people saying "there is a ticket you can get that is valid, and cheaper, if you are prepared to be challenged by a guard. Let me know if you are" and in fact most people do not want to be challenged and do not want the 'enhanced' advice and just accept the general advice we make public.
The advice we give to OPs (
original posters - for anyone who is unsure what OP means) can be read by anyone, often people will find the thread by a Google search later. We have to be careful not to give advice that is ludicrously complex or hard to follow that could easily result in disputes and arguments with passengers who are poorly prepared for such an encounter, and guards who barely know the RG exists.
It is hard to strike a balance, and people also do not like it when people say "I know a secret but I am not prepared to tell you", that really annoys people (and understandably so), though giving some sensible advice followed by "there are other cheaper tickets that are valid, but are likely to be challenged as they are major loopholes, PM me if you want details" would be reasonable.
A post like "
(there is a very cheap way to travel First Class between Crewe and Birmingham, which I am not disclosing on here. I will tell you if I meet you.)" would be deemed irritating to some people.
I will admit now that anyone who does meet us in person (at any
forum meet, e.g. Challenges, meals, fares workshops) is able to have a very friendly, informal chat where we may well reveal things that are not appropriate for the forum, and once we have met people we may well be more inclined to share information. That is pretty obvious stuff, and is hardly ground-breaking or shocking and I'm sure applies elsewhere too! But wording it in such a way that you tell people there is a particular ticket but you aren't telling them until you meet them, the wording sounds a little harsh. Of course, as I know you, I realise you did not mean for it to come across that way. It's difficult to get the balance right, and to get the wording right, I'll accept that!
