je to špatně popsané, to je vše

to je právě ten problém, že si někdo stále plete co je světlo (to co ve tmě vydává nějakou barvu) a to, co je nesvítí a je vyrobeno z plechu nebo plastu a je stejně tvrdé ...

see talk:Mueschel

ahoj, ty odstavné koleje za budovou železničního musea jsou nové nebo už vykopané? od vyhybky 8 a 12

@fiascoi ... Anas is the main one who claims to be the best, and the others agree with him, according to a Czech proverb.

add ... Or at least rewrite a critical article about mistakes and shortcomings on Wiki pages in a way that suits the other side.

@ALL Yes, the best way to get rid of opposition is to eliminate it. This is the classic method of autocratic rule in practice, where weak individuals feel strong under the wing of their ruler.

@Anas ... Sure, you can report it. As for the discussion, you yourself are shutting it down with various excuses and attacks. You claim that you are the best and that you know everything. Can you prove it somehow? Is there any discussion about your primacy? You see, it's exactly the same. You yourself are committing similar attacks by placing yourself above others, thereby claiming that others are stupid and only you are smart. If you are talking about a discussion of my proposal, where is the discussion about editing methods from fiasco? Hmm????

@fiasco ... Who said you should add, rewrite, or correct anything? In your arrogance, you rewrote parts of the text to suit your opinion.

@Anas ... Your response expresses nothing but arrogance and unwillingness to accept other, and above all better, solutions. You have been living with the old system for a long time, and accepting a new or better method would mean admitting you were wrong. You are clearly incapable of doing that. And one more thing... what a coincidence, you happened to notice something? That's a lame excuse. You were warned to join the majority, unfortunately the one that is incapable of modernization and active change.
I don't care if they have it described differently or the same way in DE, PL, AT, those are their railways.
Have you really read all the traffic regulations of the neighboring states you mention? And have you understood them? That's really surprising, because it takes a lot of time, but you wrote that you can't answer because you have to work.

@fiasco: What you write is simply untrue. There are many of my answers and explanations on the wiki discussion page. On the contrary, your unwillingness and attitude of repeating the same questions, your misunderstanding of the structure of signals, and your lack of cooperation have led to this situation. You seem to have forgotten that I corrected some things based on your comments and those of vrabcak. The fact that I did not correct everything offended you, in your opinion. In specific cases, I acknowledged my mistake or error and corrected it. You are unable to do so, like a small child.

@vrabcak: User Anas initiated the personal attack with false accusations that I am not communicating. Will you send him a warning as well? On the contrary, Anas still hasn't answered some questions.

@fiasko I spent over a year creating the description on the wiki, no one had any objections, and you had plenty of time to submit suggestions. As I expected, you settle scores through third parties (Anas).

Add 2, @Anas... why haven't you answered yet? You claim above that I don't want to communicate, but you remain silent and don't answer!!!

Add 3, @Anas... do you have the SZDC-D1 regulation in front of you on your desk? And do you understand it? Probably not. It's just your empty and manipulative phrase. If you understand it, you should have answered in Czech. If you can read Czech regulations, you must know Czech, otherwise you have again stated something untrue and it is fraud.

Add 2, @Anas... why haven't you answered yet? You claim above that I don't want to communicate, but you remain silent and don't answer!!!

Add 3, @Anas... do you have the SZDC-D1 regulation in front of you on your desk? And do you understand it? Probably not. It's just your empty and manipulative phrase. If you understand it, you should have answered in Czech. If you can read Czech regulations, you must know Czech, otherwise you have again stated something untrue and it is fraud.

add @Anas ... One more question: who approved and agreed to the description of signals based on the "fiasco" model? My method was and is to first create a diagram and then use it consistently. Fiasco did not do this, he just started creating descriptions. As you write, your words... not agreed upon.

add @Anas ... One more question: who approved and agreed to the description of signals based on the "fiasco" model? My method was and is to first create a diagram and then use it consistently. Fiasco did not do this, he just started creating descriptions. As you write, your words... not agreed upon.

@vrabcak. v popisu návěstidla, např. railway:signal:main=Cs-D1:L1 je to bez mzery, ano, ref píšu s mezerou abych lépe viděl které návěstidlo jsem opravil, Pro renderování se dá mezera vypustit (vyjmout). Jistě, pokud to bude nutné, může to být i bez ní.

1) Old schemas are mostly duplicates of tags; among other things, they allow incorrect descriptions to be assigned to otherwise correctly described signals.
2) On the contrary, the repairs are in accordance with D1. The regulations for Polish railways are different and cannot be confused.
3) Did Detective-fiasko have any description template approved for Czech railways? Without creating any example for Cs, he began copying inappropriate signage from other countries.
4) What lack of response? Have we ever corresponded? You are clearly trying to exert pressure and gain an advantage. What you are writing about mutual communication is a complete lie and untrue. Fiasco probably asked you to defend his mistakes in creating descriptive diagrams.
5) Railway regulations vary from country to country, not all aspects can be directly applied, but correctly filled object tags are sufficient for describing signals and their rendering for ORM; there is no need to invent duplicate descriptions such as "CZ-D1:hlavni_navestidlo" ... This is directly given by the description of the "railway:signal:main" tag, which is standard.

Your comment that they do not communicate is clearly provocative and an attack on other editors.

1) Old schemas are mostly duplicates of tags; among other things, they allow incorrect descriptions to be assigned to otherwise correctly described signals.
2) On the contrary, the repairs are in accordance with D1. The regulations for Polish railways are different and cannot be confused.
3) Did Detective-fiasko have any description template approved for Czech railways? Without creating any example for Cs, he began copying inappropriate signage from other countries.
4) What lack of response? Have we ever corresponded? You are clearly trying to exert pressure and gain an advantage. What you are writing about mutual communication is a complete lie and untrue. Fiasco probably asked you to defend his mistakes in creating descriptive diagrams.
5) Railway regulations vary from country to country, not all aspects can be directly applied, but correctly filled object tags are sufficient for describing signals and their rendering for ORM; there is no need to invent duplicate descriptions such as "CZ-D1:hlavni_navestidlo" ... This is directly given by the description of the "railway:signal:main" tag, which is standard.

*kde předpokládám, že umístění SUBTITUTE je dostatečně znázorněno.