Greater Greater Washington

Report a Comment

Wow, this thread is really bringing out the vitriol against me.

Peter: I wasn't, or at least didn't mean to be, dismissive of Kim's problems with the NIMBY term. However, Kim was claiming that I've been writing about projects I know nothing about, without ever saying how and why I was wrong.

I'm always happy to have people tell me why I'm wrong, and sometimes I change my mind. But just to say, I'm wrong because other people know better doesn't add anything to the debate. This seems like Nixon's secret plan to get out of Vietnam. I don't accept an argument that says, trust those who've lived here longer, they know what they're talking about and you don't, but we won't deign to say why.

Anyway, I've stopped using the NIMBY term, but didn't want to edit it out of this post. Though maybe I should have. I see that it raises a higher level of emotional reaction than the underlying point would warrant; it seems to lead to some people assuming that, because I called certain development NIMBYish, I must advocate for tearing everything down willy-nilly.

W.A.T.N.: Define "massive increases", please. At Takoma, for example, they want to build single-family townhouses. I've consistently advocated for more townhouse neighborhoods. Furthermore, it's never come up here, but I think there are definitely buildings on 17th Street that should be bigger. For example, the 3-story mid-century brick building at 17th and Q that holds Trio could be a taller building of comparable height to the apartment buildings across the street. A good neighborhood is a mix of densities.

And saying I want suburban-style form-based codes makes no sense, seeing as I keep railing against suburban-style form-based codes.

Anyway, I think this thread should end. I have come to agree with those that say the term NIMBY is too pejorative and should be avoided. (See? Disagreement is good.) Therefore, I'm not going to use it any more, whether to describe people who just oppose any development outright or to describe people who support development but only in other people's neighborhoods.

by David Alpert on Oct 14, 2008 2:30 pm • linkreport

Does this comment violate Greater Greater Washington's comment policy? If so, you can report it using this form and an editor will take a look.

What is the major reason you believe the comment violates the policy?
Comment is spam.
Comment attacks other individuals personally.
Comment criticizes the level of knowledge of another commenter or contributor.
Comment discourages others from posting their ideas.
Commenter is impersonating someone else.
Comment uses profanity or abusive language.
Comment advocates violent acts or harm to another.
Comment was posted in multiple areas of the site.
Comment is arguing about the comment policy.
Other:

Your name:
Your email:

Administrator pagespam