I’m of the total opposite mindset. I love having them where I travel, and I will fight to my dying breath to keep them out of my city lol.
Before I am called a hypocrite I am totally fine with other cities keeping them out. But if they’re there, I’m using them (and putting them where they belong instead of leaving them scattered everywhere like an asshole)
Hence why I clarified that I have no issue with them being removed. They’re terrible when you’re not the one using them.
It’s my same outlook with cruises. I don’t do them, but if my family wanted to take one I would probably join. I am also super cool with them being banned from the world. Feels pretty consistent to me lol
As much as the scooters used to annoy me, the Atlanta ban demonstrated that their presence has a significant positive effect on both pollution and traffic, so now I’m fine with them.
That’s not what the term means. NIMBY refers to people trying to prevent other people from using their own property in ways they don’t like, not people who don’t want shitty companies actively throwing trash in the commons.
I’m fine with them in no backyards. They are corporate waste the way people treat them 90% of the time. If people were better about them (and wore helmets!!!) and the companies actually lifted a finger to keep them out of waterways and blocking sidewalks then I’d be down to have them here.
I get you were trying to cleverly call me a NIMBY but please actually read what I am writing. Including the original comment. I was very clear.
I’m of the total opposite mindset. I love having them where I travel, and I will fight to my dying breath to keep them out of my city lol.
Before I am called a hypocrite I am totally fine with other cities keeping them out. But if they’re there, I’m using them (and putting them where they belong instead of leaving them scattered everywhere like an asshole)
You’re right, it’s very NIMBY sounding
Dude honestly sounds proud of being a NIMBY
Hence why I clarified that I have no issue with them being removed. They’re terrible when you’re not the one using them.
It’s my same outlook with cruises. I don’t do them, but if my family wanted to take one I would probably join. I am also super cool with them being banned from the world. Feels pretty consistent to me lol
I agree that you’re consistent, that’s why I said the strong initial statement sounded hypocritical
As much as the scooters used to annoy me, the Atlanta ban demonstrated that their presence has a significant positive effect on both pollution and traffic, so now I’m fine with them.
That’s not what the term means. NIMBY refers to people trying to prevent other people from using their own property in ways they don’t like, not people who don’t want shitty companies actively throwing trash in the commons.
You’re wrong:
Another!
Maybe one more?
None of those contradict my definition.
Not wanting a company dumping fucking trash in the streets is not and does not even vaguely resemble NIMBYism.
Those certain contradict your attempt to place a weird limit on for ‘NIMBY’ can be used.
You’re omitting the part where OP is fine with the “trash dumping” in the streets of other locales. That’s what makes it NIMBY (as OP admits).
edit: whelp egg on my face on this one. Wasn’t even directed at me.
Not in your backyard huh?
I’m fine with them in no backyards. They are corporate waste the way people treat them 90% of the time. If people were better about them (and wore helmets!!!) and the companies actually lifted a finger to keep them out of waterways and blocking sidewalks then I’d be down to have them here.
I get you were trying to cleverly call me a NIMBY but please actually read what I am writing. Including the original comment. I was very clear.