[adrianmonk]

The point of my comment wasn't to take a position on whether the excursion fare is good or bad. That's a trade-off with pros and cons. Your position is that the cons greatly outweigh the pros, and you make a very reasonable argument for that.

However, what the original article said is different. It said the excursion fare "exists solely to make money" and "it is a scam" (emphasis mine). As if there is no conceivable rationale at all for the existence of excursion fares and the only possible way to see it is that BART is simply greedy.

BART may be greedy, or maybe they're just not seeing the balance of pros and cons. I don't know. I thought the article went overboard in being so confident that BART's motives are definitely nefarious.

TLDR: It's not that I'm favor of the excursion fare; it's that I'm against articles with hyperbolic melodrama.