Greater Greater Washington

Report a Comment

HogWash, the natural progression of transportation was hardly walking - horses - cars. There were a few intermediate steps there...

I used purposely used "things" instead of "transportation." I don't believe it makes a lot of sense to argue that planners (50 years ago) were negligent in not predicting that building "auto-centric" cities would be so horrible because it makes it harder for cyclists. I just believe it's a stretch into the unknown future and easier to Monday morning quarterback than dealing w/the reality of where we were/are. Ironically, the Harriet lady (DC planner) argued that not getting things right sometimes is a good thing. This should apply across the board imo...

Why would a response to an article written by a lobbyist at AAA seek to avoid mentioning or "railing against" AAA?

Except this is beyond simply "mentioning" AAA. It's promoting the idea an "evil" AAA and ends w/an effort to get people to switch their memberships. And since I am the target audience, you're seeing how I..and likely lots of others view such.

but there are some that do care, and for that it is worth educating people about alternatives.

Totally agree that a small fraction of the members are concerned about things like this. Absolutely nothing wrong w/the education effort. It's the negative "evil" characterization I reject.

We also over the years have redesigned many elements of our cities to make auto travel as convenient as possible, to the detriment of our cities.

Yes, but that shouldn't mean the people were "evil" for doing so which seems to be a common theme nowadays. I get the sentiment. But the negative characterizations (as presented here and in other discussions) are such a drain...:(

by HogWash on Feb 14, 2013 4:25 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