"How you do bags in a crowded train"

How crowded can it be if there's an empty seat right next to her?

Very crowded, actually. People are too passive here to actually ask a person to move their damn bag half the time.

And it's been kinda cute watching Seattleites start learning subway/metro etiquette. I'm guessing we'll get the hang of it in a year or two.

That said, the two-level setup of these trains is horrible for crowding/flow. Ugh.

Can't wait until we criminalize standing on escalators. Absolutely no excuse, unless you're legally disabled.

I would add that if you're standing in front by the door, step off to let people off and then get back on.

And if you're waiting on the platform, Stand Back so people can get off the train before you try to get on

@2, agreed. The trains should have long benches along either side & huge amount of standing room in the middle. These trains are the opposite.

the lord loves a public transit scold.

Escalators are designed to move stationary people, if you desire to walk up or down take the stairs.

Can Seattleites also PLEASE learn to stand to the right on the escalator so people in a hurry can move up the left-hand side?

The news footage of the opening weekend of the Seattle light rail showed very efficient passenger traffic flow--with people standing abreast on the escalators...as has been proven they should...rather than wasting half the escalator's capacity by leaving it empty for the few who might decide to walk.

The idea that people save significant time by walking on an escalator is an illusion. You're actually making it worse for everyone by demanding people leave room for your foolishness.

@10, it's more the principality of the matter. You're just standing there on an escalator - which is in reality simply a set of stairs - so maybe, just maybe, instead of being a lazy American and enjoying zero exertion, perhaps we might place one foot in front of the other in order to climb said stairs and go about our day. Standing stationary on stairs is maddening. People actually stand on these things on the way down, as well, ffs.

@8 No. No they are not. They are designed to move people. Period.

Escalators are generally in places where people may need to get somewhere in a hurry - like to catch airplanes - for a variety of reasons that should beyond your sanctimonious judgments.

Don't be an asshole. Just stand to the right and let people by. It costs you nothing but a slight amount of courtesy and awareness of others.

I'm kind of disappointed in this article. I mean, a real piece of the kind of quality Stranger journalism we expect would have made Seattle transit behavior our own (Why do we need to imitate other cities?) It would have explored all the ways Seattle-nice-meets-Seattle-passive-aggression on the train. For example, the method to get somebody to move their bag off a seat you covet would be to silently stare laser beams at the person until they look at you so you can roll your eyes at them.

How about this: If you're last to arrive at the station or bus stop, that doesn't mean you're the first to hop on.

I've practically throttled douchebags (and shamed a few, who then are like, "oh, sorry") who show up right when the bus shows up and cuts in front of all of the people who've been sitting/standing there for 10-20 minutes.

Clearly, there needs to be a route that takes people directly to the re-education camps.

@12 An escalator is NOT simply a set of stairs.

From WeLoveDC.com discussing the walk/ride escalators in Washington DC:
--WMATA Spokesperson Ron Holzer says that Metro recommends that all “riders stand and hold the hand rail as the safest way to go up and down and enjoy the ride”, as this is what escalators were meant to do. Escalator steps weren’t intended for walking, and they are taller than typical stairs, which increases the risk of tripping or being injured. Mr. Holzer says simply, “People shouldn’t walk on moving escalators.” That gives us Reason #1: It’s safer to stand still on escalators.--

And again, studies show that the percentage of people who walk while on escalators to be somewhere between 25% (at the highest) and 10% (at the low end)...so, in a busy situation, it is HORRIBLY inefficient to expect that 50% of the escalators capacity to be unused. In a high volume situation, that means that vast majority of people must be moved slower simply because you want the unfettered opportunity to move yourself slightly faster.

That's the exploitative capitalism of transport, right there. If you're talking about it being "the principle of the matter"--you are doing it wrong, the people you slander as being lazy are doing it correctly.

You have a choice. Be smart, efficient, safe, concerned about others and correct OR be a self-entitled asshole and wrong.

That's the principle of the matter.

@19 "it frees up the other side so everyone who isn't a lazy slob can walk"

You can say this over and over to yourself if it makes you feel better about your choices and your attitude towards other people.

Just know that science and design both prove that you're wrong.

@20, what gets you to the top faster: standing on an escalator or walking up said escalator?

I looked at a Slog post dated March 21st titled "best new hallway in Seattle" and I see a picture showing an up moving escalator and right next to it a stairway. Again, if you want to walk then take the stairs. On the whole it is not a good thing to be in a hurry on a moving device. I do keep to the right, by the, and don't mind people moving past me. You need to tone down your controlling attitude Mr. Mudede.

Walking up the escalator is faster. Think about your basic work problem: (1/a) + (1/b) = (1/T). If the time it takes for you to walk up the steps, if stationary, is "a" and the time it takes for each step to go from bottom to top is "b", then "T" is the time it takes when both you and the escalator work together. If you have trouble visualizing how much of a difference it makes, find a set of stairs next to an escalator, and walk up the stairs while a friend walks up the escalator.

A particularly large crowd may force everyone to stand on an escalator, but if you are not sharing a step, please stand to the right. If you need both rails for stability, there should be hand rails in the elevator.

@22 I don't think you get to play the victim card when you've called anyone who doesn't agree with your choices a "lazy slob."

And your anecdotal percentages (nearly everyone already and automatically stands on the right) seems to fly in the face of the arguments made by others on this thread...and in threads on many articles about escalator etiquette, which makes it seem like it is a terribly problem caused by supposedly terrible people.

Again, all I'm pointing out is that science is proving that commonly held beliefs about escalator etiquette are incorrect and inefficient...and injurious.

Japan, in response significant and increasing numbers of escalator injuries, is actively working to stop people from walking on escalators:

http://www.thestar.com/news/insight/2015…

---

@21 That escalator wasn't built just for me. That escalator was built to efficiently and safely move large numbers of people...and the best way for it to do that is for people to ride, standing, side-by-side...rather than leaving half of it empty for the minority of people who might want to ignore the inherent design of the machine by walking on it.

Expecting that half of the escalator not to be used just for your personal preference is selfish and makes things demonstrably worse for the majority. And your question about what choice might move me--just me, not everyone--faster is further proof of self-involved thinking.

Maybe that's the American way...or the capitalist way. It's certainly not a civilized way of thinking.

To humor you, though...if I was in such a rush that the efficiency of an escalator isn't enough, I'd take the stairs--which are meant to be walked on, compared to escalators which are not.

terrible (not terribly)

The idea that a standing-only escalator is more efficient than mixed standing/walking is only true in continuous, high-traffic conditions where people are riding two-abreast on every step. For this to happen, there have to be so many people that there is a queue waiting to board the escalator (as there was on ULink opening day, and after concerts and sporting events). But in the low-to-moderate traffic conditions normally experienced in Link stations, there is no efficiency gained by having everyone stand, as the escalators are usually not even filled to half capacity.

"Stand to the right" is a simplification that works most of the time. The more efficient rule is, "if you didn't have to wait to get on the escalator, stand to the right."

@pg13, thanks for educating these escalator ignoramuses. It's always funny to see the totally wrong-headed, self-righteous indignation on this issue.

It is more efficient for everyone to stand on the escalator. This has been covered in numerous places, but here are links for those that doubt it.

Slate: Don’t Walk on Escalators. It’s Faster if…

The Telegraph: The simulation that proves standing only…

The Guardian: The tube at a standstill: why TfL stoppe…

Off-peak, which is pretty much Seattle at all times, does not fit the above examples for moving massive amounts of people like would be necessary in the London tube. Seattle trains are tiny in comparison, and only small numbers of people then use the escalator. Standing to the right while non-lazy people walk up the left, then, is 100% appropriate.

If it's a matter of safety, I suggest you wear a helmet upon leaving the house every morning. Life isn't safe.

Despite the fact that all other people on transit behave like boorish assholes, i've never heard a single person cop to their own subway faux pas.

@30, Seattle is not off-peak at all times. That is ridiculous.

It is quite common during peak times to disembark at Westlake and find the escalator up from the platform completely packed.

@30 Escalator injuries in the United States are significant and growing (from 4,900 injuries and deaths in 1990 to 12,260 injuries and deaths in 2013.) Over 3/4ths of those injuries and deaths are due to falls.

(SOURCE: https://www.justice.org/sections/newslet… )

You joke about life not being safe--but escalators are not designed to be unsafe. Neither are they designed for people to walk on them.

And most people don't. Again, studies show that only 10-25% (depending on the study) of the populace walk on escalators. I think it is patently unfair to describe 75-90% of the public as simply "lazy". Perhaps they're better informed? Perhaps they're more concerned about their safety and the safety of others? Perhaps they don't microwave their Pop-Tarts instead of toasting them just to save a couple of seconds?

One last piece of the puzzle. The Washington State Department of Labor and Industry produces a pamphlet on escalator and elevator safety with answers to supposedly frequently asked questions and handy tips for how to properly ride both escalators and elevators as well as moving walkways.

http://lni.wa.gov/IPUB/621-084-000.pdf

That pamphlet instructs people to "stand in the center and hold on to a hand rail" of an escalator. While clearly proven, standing abreast is the most efficient way to utilize escalators...the State of Washington is willing to put efficiency aside for the sake of safety.

When you demand that people stand on the right so you can walk--you're not only ignoring the inherent design of the escalator...you're not only endangering yourself and others by your actions, you're also expecting people to endanger themselves...just for your temporary personal convenience.

Ehh, I'll stand.

Whoa, escalators. What a debate!
I can accept that it might be more efficient in high traffic situations if everyone stand two abreast on a step. (@18's point) And sure, it is statistically safer too.

However, blip @19's point that no matter the density, people stand one-to-a-step regardless, is more accurate than some "designed ideal" way of riding that will take a large amount of social conditioning to reach in reality.
So what's it harming everyone else to simply stay to the right?

This "two abreast" efficiency is not even slightly achieved here in Seattle which has a sub-Tokyo population density, to say nothing of everyone's general social awkwardness.

If you can magically make that happen, I'll gladly stand two-abreast on an escalator (in high traffic situations). Otherwise, when you are the only one standing on your escalator step, be nice and stand to the right.

My observations match Blip's. Hardly anyone stands on the same step, especially not with a stranger. Most won't even stand on the step directly behind a stranger. And unless it's very very crowded it's not particularly inefficient to leave the left lane open.

Fucking hell, Seattle is provincial.

Oh Dear God, can we lay off the escalator debate?

Here's a change of topic: The reason why the cars have those upper levels is because that's where the wheels are. Yes or no? Discuss.

I think it's really rude to tar all escalator standees as lazy, as several commenters have. I stand on the escalator because I can't manage stairs, and that's for two reasons -- my legs are really stiff, and the focal division in my bifocals makes seeing the stair edges difficult. But you guys keep on snarking "lazy" at those of us who need to stand without stopping to consider such factors, so I hope it makes you all feel better.

Thank you Charles for the 'TAKE OFF YOU BACKPACK," I really don't need another bruise on my boob. Personal space = body space, not body+pack people.

@pg13, it's pretty entertaining watching you grasping at straws to justify being a lazy, selfish asshole. The concern trolling about how I might hurt myself because I can't negotiate tall stairs was especially funny.

If you can't or don't want to walk up an escalator, stand to the right. Whether this is because you're lazy or because you're disabled, I won't care because you'll be out of my way. But if you insist on standing to the left, and the escalator isn't filled to capacity, then I can only assume you're a lazy, selfish asshole.

@40 I live to entertain...but I'm saddened to learn that your entertainment is based on a basic inability to absorb factual information.

So, let's review.

1) Escalators are designed to be ridden...not to be walked on. (Evidence posted above from Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority Ron Holzer on WeLoveDC.com.)

2) Escalators injuries are going up dramatically. (Evidence posted above from Pew Research Center via Justice.org)

3) In order to reduce escalator injuries, Japan is encouraging people to stop walking on escalators. (Evidence posted above from the Toronto Star.)

I don't see any straws being grasped here. The points that I'm making are backed up by science and research.

And I don't see this as concern trolling (I have no particular investment in preventing you from hurting yourself...go for it.)

The discussion was about how people should ride escalators and the commonly held assumption is that people should stand on one side to let other people walk on the other. (Which started with the "Squirrels" designation in Charles' original post and the repetition in the comments section of arguments made here on Slog when this topic has been debated before...)

4) Studies (especially the Transport For London study that has been linked above) show that in high volume situations, this is inefficient--that more people can be moved faster if people stand on both sides...that it makes no sense to "save" 50% of an escalators capacity for the 10-25% of people who walk while on escalators.

People that ignore that...people who only care that they, as individuals, have unfettered access to use an escalator incorrectly and possibly dangerously...are more honestly described as selfish. (Independent assessments would be necessary to determine how much of an asshole said persons might be.)

At no point did I suggest that people purposefully stand on the left to stop people from walking up or down escalators. At no point did I even suggest that I, myself, always stand while on escalators. I didn't make my personal behavior part of the argument. I don't see how you can make the assumption that I am lazy based on my pointing out facts about escalators. I don't know how you can say that I'm selfish when I'm discussing how to use escalators in the most efficient way for the masses.

Am I an asshole for pointing out the facts about how escalators should be ridden based on scientific research and design instead of commonly held (but ultimately incorrect) beliefs?

Maybe. That one's not my call.

I just get tired of the arrogance of people who cling to ignorance, smug in their belief that whatever lets them do what they want to do is the right way to do things, regardless of other people or new information. (Check out Hamilton Nolan's Gawker article where he opines that people who don't walk down escalators, on either side, deserve to be pushed down said escalators...and the number of people who agree with that sentiment in the comments there.)

Sometimes, you have to change your mind in the face of actual facts. Sometimes, we all do.

I can think of a specific example where I did. I read the book "Traffic" by Tom Vanderbilt. In it, he describes the situation of what happens when a traffic sign alerts drivers to a lane closure happening two miles ahead. The commonly held belief is that is a signal to start forming a single lane of traffic...and that people who continue driving in the lane about to be closed are looked upon with disdain and often are blocked from merging at the actual point where the lane ends. Vanderbilt shows how incredibly inefficient that is...that single file lane quickly backs up with two miles of unused but perfectly drive-able road in the other lane. The correct approach in this situation is to fill both lanes and then to "zipper" at the merger point--but because so many people cling to the outdated and inefficient method, it can even be dangerous for individual drivers to try to unilaterally effect change. There are states that are now teaching the zipper method in driver's ed and others that are spending money on ad campaigns designed to change the entrenched habits of veteran drivers. Veteran drivers like myself--mea culpa.

The escalator topic is directly analogous to the lane closure example. The entrenched habit in both is inefficient and potentially dangerous. The entrenched habit should be changed.

Not because it would directly benefit me. Not because that's the way that I personally want it to be. Not even because that's what I do in every situation I find myself in.

It should be changed because it is the better way to do things for everyone concerned.

And your desire to shave a couple of seconds off your own personal travel simply isn't a strong enough argument against the common good.

Escalators are designed to move mass numbers of people safely and efficiently. That is best done by people standing (and in high volume situations, by them standing two abreast)...not by leaving half of the escalator empty for the statistically small number of people who would choose to walk on something meant to be ridden.

It's not terribly entertaining...but it's factual.

CATEGORY: Petard, hoisted myself upon.

I claim to be factual and then I mess up the identify one information source.

The information from Justice.org did not come from the Pew Research Center (I was thinking of information cited in another Slog thread.) There are footnotes sourcing the individual statistics on that Justice.org link given earlier in this thread.

Doesn't impact the arguments made...but always good to be accurate (especially when touting one's accuracy.)

If you are on an escalator and want to walk up it while someone is blocking your way, try saying "excuse me, could I squeeze through?"

I know this kind of thing is ground breaking and really scary to people who live in Seattle, but you can talk to strangers. You may find they are often kinder and more understanding than you think!

@43, I tried that groundbreaking tactic yesterday with a guy who was standing next to his friend on an otherwise empty escalator at the CH station, and he looked at me like I just shat on his granny. All I said was "mind if I squeeze by? Thank you."

Baby steps.

Can we stop calling it 'Manspreading'? I used to earn a living teaching folks with disabilities how to ride public transit (Navigation, emergencies, loading/unloading, etc). In that job I started paying attention to seat usage and can say that I saw about a 3-1 ratio of 'seat overuse' being done by women. I'd say the most typical offender would be a woman under 40, usually absorbing the extra seat with a bag, often being somewhat passive-aggressive and 'looking off' potential seat-mates.

The thing is this, what if you don't have time to be polite?

@46 No, we are not going to stop calling it "manspreading". Women don't sit with their legs spread way out, men do. Men air out their stinky, sweaty balls on transit all the time. The bag thing is inappropriate too, but man spreading is a specific posture with a specific name that isn't going to go away because of some offended MRA bullshit.