User talk:TIB1051D

Re: Clarifications - SV 961
Hi, it has been a while since we mentioned about this topic again.

However, until today we still see 1343P sticking to 961 on same slot and 481C running as sp with only occasional reappearance on 961. Even as sp, we can't guarantee that 481C reappears on the same slot too. If a duty roster insist 481C perms but yet 1343P always run, perm is alr 1343P and everyone can tell. There are times when duty roster are not totally updated. I mean if the time comes when 481C deregisters and if roster still insists 481C and update late, you still want to say 481C still perm 961 and havent die yet?

Otherwise aren't we sticking to outdated info based on paper?

I not doubting your reasons for argument but I'm alr doubting the fact that if planned deployment is 481C but actual deployment is 1343P, and 1343P has alr been repeated deployed everytime on that same slot, wouldn't the fact that the planned deployment has already changed turned true?

Yes, I may not know as much how bus operations work. But what is happening is already happening, even many other people already mentioned about this controversy.

You may want to reconsider your position again. For now, I will revert the edits back. However, if you still insist that "No, everything should stick to planned deployment on duty roster. Even if 481C were to die sooner, wait till that day comes den see how again", feel free to rebut me and undo all my edits.

All I am doing is just let updates be updated to the most current. But if you think that we should still stick to deployment on paper and updating everything to current is not the way to professional editing on sgwiki, I won't say anything further and just respect your decision.

Thank you!