Sorry to be a killjoy, but that's actually NOT what
@The Ham , or I, are saying, and linking that to our posts is itself logically flawed.
If people on here were saying something like,
"People in the North shouldn't complain about their rail provision because it's even worse in Outer Mongolia or wherever", then that link would be very relevant. But I'm pretty sure that's not what anyone is saying.
What I - and I'm fairly sure
@The Ham and others are saying is more like: By all means complain about poor rail provision in Sheffield or Leeds or Manchester or wherever, but do so for the right reasons - and there's no need to start bashing the South or setting up a North vs South thing in the process. In other words: Campaign for better rail provision because it would be much better for the environment, and for quality of life, and for economic development etc. etc. if those places (and lots of other places) had better public transport, including rail. And because in many cases because the poor rail provision is almost certainly suppressing demand. You can say all that, and make detailed arguments for specific improvements (such as new through platforms at Piccadilly, a decent metro service between Dore and Rotherham, more electrification, longer trains etc.) without at the same time spoiling your arguments by trying to knock other parts of the country. After all, while it's certainly true that some places have better rail services than other places, there's virtually nowhere in the country (even London) where public transport provision is really adequate for having a sustainable transport network.