justhere

My point was that what you said was confusing. You said that if B40 cuts the line it either has no impact or a negative impact. You went on to say if something is either neutral or negative then overall it's negative. So my confusion came about because you seem to be implying that if there's no impact to anyone on the flight then that's a negative experience.
You like those false comparisons don't you? There's no reserved sign on any seats on WN. EBCI doesn't guarantee you any particular seat on the plane. Very poor analogy you are using.
How does anyone save a seat if someone could sit there if they wanted to? That's the whole point that people argue. "I'm going to sit where I want if the seat is open". "I'm saving the seat no matter what". Just because A15 didn't prevent someone from sitting there doesn't mean they didn't sit down with the intent to save the seat. And this was in response to another poster saying that seat saving and line cutting are unequivocally the same thing. I was pointing out that it's not that cut and dried. A15 saved a seat. That no one had yet attempted to sit there doesn't make it any less saved. I guess it depends on how you interpret it. Is it only saved if I have to tell someone it's saved? Is it only saved if I put my jacket on it? Is it saved and I got lucky because no one asked? Seat saving doesn't always affect people because it turns out that no one wanted that seat.
Why, because it shoots holes in your math? You said "A more appropriate metric (denominator) is occurrence per flight". So if you take that 1 seat saved as the numerator and divide it by the occurrence per flight (denominator), in this case the same 1 seat, you end up with 100% seat saving. You can disagree with that all you want. It's what you wrote.

Kevin AA

All Southwest has to do is publish a policy on their website "no seat saving" and instruct the cabin crew to inform people who try to save a seat when someone else wants to sit there that Southwest has open seating -- first come, first served. Stop letting the cabin crew decide for themselves that it's okay to save an entire exit row (or even one middle seat). Consistency is the key. They don't need to make an announcement before each flight. Just board the plane and take any open seat, and if another passenger tries to stop you, the cabin crew can intervene and say NO. Simple as that!

Kevin AA

No impact to anyone on the flight can only occur with no seat saving. The end!

yes yes and no

If you imagine yourself saving the seat but do nothing ACTUALLY attempt to save it, then you are not saving a seat.

Kevin AA

As an example from my line of work:

Sometimes a patron will try to slide more chips into the spot after they get their first two initial cards. This is a good move for a cheater if said cheater has a 20, especially if I have a 2-6 showing. When I see this, I put a stop to it. So far I've not had to call security on anyone, because they know what they are doing and don't want to get banned, but if someone pushes the issue, I have no problem calling security, they will review the tapes, and then the patron will be banned from playing there ever again.

If a cheater gets a 9+7 and I have a 10 or ace showing, it would be pretty stupid to try to increase the bet after the cards are dealt. This is the equivalent to saving a seat that no one wants.

What the WN seat savers are arguing is that if no one else wants the seat, no harm, no foul, and if someone does, oh well, pick another seat a few rows back. Southwest can afford to lose a few bucks from someone who gets pissed off at this greedy and childish behavior without going out of business. My casino can afford to lose a few bucks from someone who slides another chip into the spot for a good hand. Unlike Southwest, however, we do not tolerate this behavior.

justhere

You got me there. I can't compete with someone who doesn't understand analogies and compares something illegal to something that is not only perfectly legal but absolutely acceptable to do.

Kevin AA

fine, be an overgrown toddler

rsteinmetz70112

It's really all that matters. IN the process of boarding some people select different seats. The poeple following then select form the remaining availible seats. . As long as a person is able to select an equivalent seat there has been no negative impact.
This totally ignores the probability that some passenger will have chosen the particular seat a following passenger might have chosen. As long as an equivalent seat is available the later boarding passenger has suffered no loss. In some instances one passenger may have saved a seat for a later boarding passenger and the later boarding passenger's boarding position is later than the passenger who saved the seat. In that case there was no negative effect.
Tonight my A-list+ wife boarded at A 20. She sat in the aisle seat of the LUV row (her preferred seats when we travel together). As A-List I boarded at A 35. None of the intervening 15 passengers attempted to sit in the "middle" seat in the LUV row. When I arrived I took the aisle and she moved to the "middle" No one was even aware she had "saved" a seat. No one was negatively impacted however some other couple who prefer the LUV seats may have been displaced. This happens to us from time to time. When it does happen the later boarding companion is usually much later than we usually are. We are disappointed but even if that seat wasn't "saved" neither of us would have taken the other seat in that row.


Good luck with that people regularly ignore announcements including the Southwest employees handling boarding. As described above a lot of seat saving involved making a particular seat less desirable.

rsteinmetz70112

It's really all that matters. In the process of boarding people select different seats. The people following then select form the remaining available seats. As long as a person is able to select an equivalent seat there has been no negative impact.
This totally ignores the probability that some passenger will have chosen the particular seat a following passenger might have chosen. As long as an equivalent seat is available the later boarding passenger has suffered no loss. In some instances one passenger may have saved a seat for a later boarding passenger and the later boarding passenger's boarding position is later than the passenger who saved the seat. In that case there was no negative effect.
Tonight my A-list+ wife boarded at A 20. She sat in the aisle seat of the LUV row (her preferred seats when we travel together). As A-List I boarded at A 35. None of the intervening 15 passengers attempted to sit in the "middle" seat in the LUV row. When I arrived I took the aisle and she moved to the "middle" No one was even aware she had "saved" a seat. No one was negatively impacted however some other couple who prefer the LUV seats may have been displaced. This happens to us from time to time. When it does happen the later boarding companion is usually much later than we usually are. We are disappointed but even if that seat wasn't "saved" neither of us would have taken the other seat in that row.


Good luck with that people regularly ignore announcements including the Southwest employees handling boarding. As described above a lot of seat saving involved making a particular seat less desirable.

flyingill

justhere

Says the person who doesn't understand analogies, logic, and calls people names. If you want to have an adult discussion put forth something that actually makes sense. You know, an adult discussion.

Here's something that might resonate with you. I have 24 cookies and 23 classmates. Kevin gets upset if he doesn't get a chocolate chip cookie so I'm going to save one for him. I put out all the cookies except two. One for me and one for my friend Kevin. I set those on a napkin next to the tray of cookies. Some are chocolate chip, some sugar, and a few oatmeal raisin. Classmates line up with the one who scored the highest on the math test getting first pick and then the second highest, etc. Kevin is number 15 in line (bright kid, has potential, distracted easily - said his last report card). Kids 1 through 14 help themselves and everyone gets their favorite cookie. Kevin's turn comes along and I give him the cookie I saved for him. No one before Kevin asked for the chocolate chips sitting next to the tray so even though I saved them, it had no impact on anyone else.

So saving something doesn't always impact someone.

LegalTender

The airline can't hear you. And knows you'll be back.

A bad Panera Bread in the right neighborhood has clemency.

joshua362

I like this analogy & logic except for one little flaw, it sounds like the cookies are a unexpected gift (like your Mom baking for your birthday) so the recipients no have right or reason to be choosy since they did not "pay" for the right to eat a particular cookie. Somebody in the last third is going to have to end up with the middle cookie (oatmeal raisin) when they really wanted a chocolate chip!

With that logic, perhaps seat saving could be permitted only after BS, AL+, AL and EB'ers have boarded?

BTW, I do think seat saving is non issue. I used to be routinely screwed after paying up for BS and having a late connection. No one had any sympathies for me!

Allan38103

This just shows that you, like many of the other posters on this thread, choose not to understand what "open seating" really means. You can sit ANYWHERE you want. If there is a bag already there, just move it. If someone says "Those seats are saved," (yes, it is not prohibited to say this) just sit there anyway. You may wish to be polite and say "Sorry, I'm sitting here anyway." After all, it's your choice.

If you make a conscious personal decision to not press the issue with the passenger asking to save the seat, then move on to as different seat. After all, it's ultimately your choice.

justhere

It wasn't an unexpected gift. You know how it is these days, every kid in the class has to be invited to every birthday party. It just happened to be my turn to bring the cookies. Tomorrow is somebody else's turn.

Seriously though, doesn't matter that they didn't pay. What matters is that they lined up in the correct order, no matter how that correct order was established. And if someone in the last third wanted chocolate chip, they could have easily asked for one of the two that were sitting right next to the tray. That and comparisons/analogies never really work the way people think they do (me included).

toomanybooks