bdongray wrote:I understand that any "Yes" or "No" answer maybe what you think now.
eg you may vote <b>Yes</b>, but once you get there you've got other things to do, and you just don't make it.
Or maybe you vote <b>No</b>, but when you hear of some great vehicle that was unreasonably denied, but it's sitting out there, and it is the "in" thing everyone is going to, you may get convinced to go too.
Or maybe you vote No, but when you hear of some great vehicle that was unreasonably denied...
As a spectator how do you know the DMV is unreasonable? Or is this just the way you mess with shit you know nothing about?
unjonharley wrote:As a spectator how do you know the DMV is unreasonable?
unjonharley wrote:The DMV dose not judge "art". This mistake shows me your shooting from the hip. I suggest you read the "DMVs" guidelines. So you can understand what "your talking about".
bdongray wrote:unjonharley wrote:As a spectator how do you know the DMV is unreasonable?
As a spectator: how do I know they are not?
bdongray wrote:No comments about the rest of my post?
Have you any words of wisdom on why you feel the DMV is perfect?
Why it is wrong of me to want to clarify whether this is an issue that needs to be addressed or not (eg in the town hall meeting)? I prefer facts on which to base my opinion, and I would gladly like to hear anything anyone has about this issue (eg number of licenses last year, number of approvals/denials this year and what the denial was based on), but so far I hear what sounds like too many surprising refusals based on someones judgement of art. So I want to judge for myself by visiting the impound lot.
Last year some folks camped down the street from us drove to the event in a panel van. Once at the event they hung loud speakers on the outside, covered the thing with astroturf and now it was an art car which they used to travel from place to place playing music through the loud speakers. I'm hoping this is the kind of thing you would find in the impound lot but I'm not interested enough to find out.
stuart wrote:sorry pal,and that includes bicycles!
I will be gleefully traversing the open playa at speeds well above 5mph on my bike.
bdongray wrote:stuart wrote:sorry pal,and that includes bicycles!
I will be gleefully traversing the open playa at speeds well above 5mph on my bike.
I believe you shouldn't!It kicks up a lot of dust.
And doing that at night is just unsafe.
If you want to cycle fast, there are other venues for that!
I believe it is this type of disregard for the existing (few) rules that caused the DMV to have to impose stronger requirements on vehicles, so who knows, maybe your type of behavior will cause bicycles to need to undergo a licensing requirement next year! When your bike had better look like a radical work of art, with major changes to the existing framework
Wendor wrote:That didn't stop you, however, from making the blanket statement that they ARE unreasonable. ("...unreasonably denied" YOUR words.)
You have no evidence whatsoever that ANY of the denials were "unreasonable", yet you chose to present your poll with a blanket statement that they were. Why?
Wendor wrote:The rest of your post is yet more uninformed opinions for which you have no facts to back them.
I have trouble believeing that you actually have the gall to state "I prefer facts on which to base my opinion" yet you declare the DMV denials "unreasonable" with no facts whatsoever.
I'd say that it really does appear that you want to stir up trouble rather than actually helping at all.
I believe it is this type of disregard for the existing (few) rules that caused the DMV to have to impose stronger requirements on vehicles,
Jordan 10-E wrote:bdongray wrote:You are joking right?
bdongray wrote:As to "not helping at all", you have not read <u>my suggestion for improvement</u>? Remember, please contribute positively. OR... please contribute your suggestions on improving the DMV system if you have a different way to solve this.
...Like a trip to the impound lot. I do hope others who have opinions here (either way, voiced or not) will also gather facts however they are able.
It's why my suggestion is to allow all vehicles next year,
bdongray wrote: Yet the DMV changed to limit the vehicles, and do not hear of anything to address the problem of driver behavior.
bdongray wrote: I am concerned about driver behavior, and it is disheartening to see people posting how it's ok to break the speed limit on a bicycle.
bdongray wrote: We'll see, as I've said all along, and I will wait for the facts, but so far the postings and discussions I've had point me to believe the DMV has been too heavy handed.
bdongray wrote: As to vehicle "rights" - with the size of BRC, if people cannot bring their own motorized transport, then maybe people can bring vehicles to be part of a public transport system?
If the rangers cannot deal with all the incidents, then maybe BRC has too many people to be one city.
bdongray wrote: BRC is far larger than a small village it seems many seem to remember it was. It has grown. In a village, people do indeed walk to the store, etc, and people cycle those slightly longer distances. But in a larger city (eg one of 30,000 people) motorized transportation becomes a necessity. If the goal is to keep walking or cycling the main mode of transport, then maybe a redesign of the city into smaller villages of a few thousand residents each - yet connected to the whole, maybe the way to go?
"The speed limit in Black Rock City is 5 MPH"
Return to 2004 Camps, Art & Activities
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest