Are you thinking of a trip to the DMV impound lot?

Exchange camp ideas, find places to perform, announce your events, etc.

Are you thinking of taking to trip to the impound lot to see the great art that was unreasonably denied access?

Poll ended at Tue Sep 07, 2004 6:21 pm

Yes - I want to see great art that the DMV denied
10
40%
No - it'll all be just golf carts and ATVs anyway
15
60%
 
Total votes : 25

Are you thinking of a trip to the DMV impound lot?

Postby bdongray » Sun Aug 22, 2004 6:21 pm

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.
--
Bryan
User avatar
bdongray
 
Posts: 87
Joined: Thu May 27, 2004 1:06 am
Location: MN, USA

Re: Are you thinking of a trip to the DMV impound lot?

Postby unjonharley » Sun Aug 22, 2004 7:24 pm

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.

/\
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?
I'm the contraptioneer your mother warned you about.
User avatar
unjonharley
 
Posts: 10023
Joined: Tue Sep 09, 2003 11:05 am
Location: Salem Or.

viva le difference between art cars and Mutant Vehicles

Postby Tiahaar » Sun Aug 22, 2004 10:32 pm

Hey yeah I could maybe see a couch...on a board...with wheels underneath...and an engine in back...and...and...actually that's all it is?
Burning Man 2003-14; Desert Carillon, HypnoHorse, Ulaume's Chimes, Iron Native, Black Rock Solar, Portal Collective, Center Camp Café Stage and Sound Tech
Keru's Phenomenal Phantasmagoria of Terrors and Delights
User avatar
Tiahaar
 
Posts: 1105
Joined: Sat Sep 20, 2003 9:13 pm
Location: Mojave Desert, CA (also Forever via Pandora)
Burning Since: 2003
Camp Name: Starship Palomino

Postby Badger » Sun Aug 22, 2004 11:21 pm

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?


Actually I'd like to see the question amswered myself.
.
Desert dogs drink deep.

Image
.
User avatar
Badger
 
Posts: 3322
Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2003 2:43 pm
Location: San Francisco

Re: Are you thinking of a trip to the DMV impound lot?

Postby bdongray » Mon Aug 23, 2004 8:33 am

unjonharley wrote:As a spectator how do you know the DMV is unreasonable?


As a spectator: how do I know they are not?

That is why I want to go see, to find out if the complaints I read and hear about are just the exceptions, or if there <b>is</b> something too harsh in the approval process that needs improvement, and might need to be discussed in the town hall meeting (or not).

I would hope that other people also would want to go see to form their opinion based on visible facts, and not on hearsay either. It's why (in other posts, when people complain) I ask to see photos, assuming I will not see that vehicle first hand in the impound lot.

Why I am so interested, is that (from what I read/hear) I am disappointed that there seems to be just a standard letter sent, without a hint at what specificially where the piece is failing, enabling a possibilty that it could be corrected - so it could be approved on a second request. Nor was there any there time setup to do a second request. I also believe that the approval process probably needed to have been done much earlier, before people put significant time and money into a creation hoping they would be approved, only to discover their efforts were wasted due to a difference of opinion in what art is.

I also do hope the DMV folks have been fair, but it is a pity they seem to have to perform a role of having to judge if something is arty enough, especially as we all know that one persons art is not always art to another. I hope they have been leaning on the side of approval - when in doubt. I feel it is sad that I hear that some vehicles were denied because the artist was not competant in filling out forms, or writing a description that could convey their concept well enough.
--
Bryan
User avatar
bdongray
 
Posts: 87
Joined: Thu May 27, 2004 1:06 am
Location: MN, USA

Postby unjonharley » Mon Aug 23, 2004 9:12 am

Bryan, You are wrong. 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".
I'm the contraptioneer your mother warned you about.
User avatar
unjonharley
 
Posts: 10023
Joined: Tue Sep 09, 2003 11:05 am
Location: Salem Or.

Postby bdongray » Mon Aug 23, 2004 10:33 am

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".


I have done, but thought I'd better recheck it again, and the sentences:
i) <i>The only Mutant Vehicles to receive licenses in 2004 will be radical works of art</i>
ii) <i>Mutant Vehicles are ?art on wheels?: radically, stunningly, (usually) permanently, and safely modified motorized vehicles.</i>
both seem fairly subjective statements, in that vehicles will be judged on how radical is it, to gain approval. If is it not stunning enough, it will not get a license.
I agree that vehicles must be safe. But I also think it is equally important that drivers must be safe, careful, and know that pedestrians have right of way.
My issue, and the rule I want to be strictly imposed is: NO SPEEDING :x
and that includes bicycles!

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.
--
Bryan
User avatar
bdongray
 
Posts: 87
Joined: Thu May 27, 2004 1:06 am
Location: MN, USA

Postby unjonharley » Mon Aug 23, 2004 11:03 am

First I agree
NO SPEEDING

NO EXCEPTIONS

A short story: My MV was turned down last year. The HOttie didn't know art from a hole in the ground He would only dwell on one part(safty at that) that was not changed. That's ok, The machine was broke down.
Now.... THe DMV is/are not that hard ass. They are working with guidelines that have been in force for a few years. Guide lines that were abused by "Art Car" persenters" They appeared weakly becuse they have allowed some crap art cars pass. Like a car with a grain auger hanging on it. I feel sure that needed changes will take place after this year. Lets hold our name calling until after the town hall meeting.
I will be back with some thing new in 05. I will make it arty,stunning and interactive W/ no whining or charging at other posters.
I'm the contraptioneer your mother warned you about.
User avatar
unjonharley
 
Posts: 10023
Joined: Tue Sep 09, 2003 11:05 am
Location: Salem Or.

Postby stuart » Mon Aug 23, 2004 12:13 pm

and that includes bicycles!


sorry pal,

I will be gleefully traversing the open playa at speeds well above 5mph on my bike.
call me baby
User avatar
stuart
 
Posts: 3328
Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2003 10:45 am
Location: East of Lincoln

Postby Interested bystander » Mon Aug 23, 2004 3:08 pm

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.
Interested bystander
 
Posts: 41
Joined: Sun Aug 31, 2003 6:34 pm
Location: Reno, Nevada

Re: Are you thinking of a trip to the DMV impound lot?

Postby Wendor » Mon Aug 23, 2004 4:06 pm

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?


You don't. You don't have enough information as a spectator to know whether they are unreasonable or not.

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
 
Posts: 42
Joined: Fri Jun 11, 2004 6:48 pm

Postby Wendor » Mon Aug 23, 2004 4:11 pm

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.


OK, comments on the rest of your post: 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.
Wendor
 
Posts: 42
Joined: Fri Jun 11, 2004 6:48 pm

Postby Badger » Mon Aug 23, 2004 5:52 pm

Agree with the baove BTW.

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.


As a minimum this is EXACTLY what will be towed or escorted to the Long Term Parking area. If the operator(s) are non-compliant then other ore severe options are available to rmedy the situation up to and including being asked to leave the event.
.
Desert dogs drink deep.

Image
.
User avatar
Badger
 
Posts: 3322
Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2003 2:43 pm
Location: San Francisco

oy vey

Postby swampdog » Tue Aug 24, 2004 9:38 am

give it a rest, guys. I think bdongray's original post was hypothetical, speaking from the POV of the survey-ee.

I.e. - No - I think all the fuss will turn out to have been whiners with golf carts
Yes - I think DMV probably rejected some great art and the impound lot will be a great visit.

He did not state his personal opinion that either of these answers was true.
User avatar
swampdog
 
Posts: 904
Joined: Thu Jul 22, 2004 8:27 am
Location: Bellingham WA
Burning Since: 2004
Camp Name: Rising Arms Pub

Postby bdongray » Tue Aug 24, 2004 10:41 am

stuart wrote:
and that includes bicycles!
sorry pal,

I will be gleefully traversing the open playa at speeds well above 5mph on my bike.

I believe you shouldn't! :x It kicks up a lot of dust. :x 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 :wink:
--
Bryan
User avatar
bdongray
 
Posts: 87
Joined: Thu May 27, 2004 1:06 am
Location: MN, USA

Postby Jordan 10-E » Tue Aug 24, 2004 10:56 am

bdongray wrote:
stuart wrote:
and that includes bicycles!
sorry pal,

I will be gleefully traversing the open playa at speeds well above 5mph on my bike.

I believe you shouldn't! :x It kicks up a lot of dust. :x 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 :wink:


You are joking right? I say we all stop walking at the event because it happens to kick up dust, little poofs of dust with every footstep.
10E
User avatar
Jordan 10-E
 
Posts: 281
Joined: Tue Sep 02, 2003 10:26 am
Location: Salt Lake City, UT
Burning Since: 2002

Re: Are you thinking of a trip to the DMV impound lot?

Postby bdongray » Tue Aug 24, 2004 11:42 am

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?

You are correct, my poll question wording is biased. Sorry.
If I could change it, I would, eg: <b>Are you thinking of taking to trip to the impound lot?</b>
Then have "yes" and "no" but expand on the responses to maybe a few reasons why "yes" or "no".

I created the question when I was quite mad about hearing yet another art car denied without giving the artist any reason seemingly without giving the artist any ability to correct whatever there might have been a problem with, and/or appeal.

As to "no evidence"...
There have been many postings (and I've heard about vehicles outside eplaya forum) where the artist does not understand why their vehicle was denied. They feel the denial was unreasonable. I believing any denial <u>without</u> giving a specific cause on why it was denied, is unreasonable. I also own up to believing that this years DMV process will have turned many people who would have created something perfectly good and within requirements, to not bother next year, since all their time, effort, and money, can be denied all too easily without appeal. This is a great loss, and may take a few years to repair unless something radical is done to <u>prove</u> things will be better next year. I know it makes <u>me</u> not want to create anything motorized, and I am glad my idea (which I couldn't do due to various life events) was not started, I do think it would have been good, but if it was not good enough in someones judgemental eyes, being denied would have been devastating. I quite feel for those who have been denied. Especially as I believed Burningman was about the freedom to express your creativity and art. Obviously I was mistaken! BUT I want things to be corrected. For <u>ME</u> I would far prefer to have plain golf carts and ATVs driving around safely and with community spirit (eg giving rides to people - which is a nice way to meet), over having artists devasted through what seems to be unreasonable and apparently unjustified denials.

Onto your second post...
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.


Of course I have no facts, it's why I want to go to the impound lot! It's also why I want to discuss this issue, and not sweep it under the carpet as if nothing is wrong.

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.

But yes, currently, I do have the viewpoint that the DMV have been too harsh in a number of cases, and that colors my postings. I apologize, but it is difficult to not have an opinion, and for that opinion to not show through. Yes, I am hoping to find out if the problem is as big as it seems to me at this time, or I may find out it is really nothing of consequence and I am only seeing a fraction of a small percentage where the edge cases could have been resolved with a positive outcome. Only more facts will find that out. 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.

I understand Badger is friendly with someone who was involved in the approval process, and I sympathize that possibly the process the DMV folks have maybe only allows them to send a blanket yes or no reply. I can also imagine trudging through all the applications could be no fun, not just for the difficulty of understanding what was sent, but also (and especially) when they know the negative replies are potentially telling someone all their months of work and all that money they've been spending are being denied to come to Burningman, without a specific reason, and without a chance to fix it (or appeal). I also cannot believe it is easy to not be a judge on the issue of is the art car is radical enough - since that is one requirement to get a license. It's why my suggestion is to allow all vehicles next year, but to only permit those where the main requirement to be transportation to be restricted to a specific highway. Of course, then a problem will be is something arty enough to be not restricted to the ringroad, but at least the artist will be able to make necessary improvements to upgrade their license, or will be able to present their art to those who view the vehicles on the ringroad.
--
Bryan
User avatar
bdongray
 
Posts: 87
Joined: Thu May 27, 2004 1:06 am
Location: MN, USA

Postby stuart » Tue Aug 24, 2004 12:18 pm

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,


If that is what you believe then you are terribly misinformed.

The BLM did not want any motorized vehicles on the playa.
The org compromised.
Someone was killed by a motorized vehicle, not a bike.

Picture me, on a bike, doing about 12mph
Now, picture La Contessa, doing about 35mph

F=MV^2

I know the difference is subtle, but please cut me some slack.
call me baby
User avatar
stuart
 
Posts: 3328
Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2003 10:45 am
Location: East of Lincoln

Postby bdongray » Tue Aug 24, 2004 12:39 pm

Jordan 10-E wrote:
bdongray wrote:You are joking right?


Mostly.
Last year, I had a friend hit (from the rear) by a bicycle who was not paying attention: cuts, bruises, and unnecessary pain, on both my friend and the rider.

I agree the amount of dust by a bike doing 12mph is probably way less than LaContessa doing 35mph. And so is the force on an impact FAR less. But I do think that if you want to ride the playa, there is no reason to cycle more than 5 mph.
I used the line <i>"go to another venue"</i> from the DMV guidelines about vehicles brought to BM to show off: Hot-Rods, Monster Trucks, and Dune-Buggies. I think it similarly applies to a desire to ride the playa at more than 5 mph.

I was joking about it causing the DMV to require licenses for bicycles - but I'll reserve judgement on that statement until next year.
--
Bryan
User avatar
bdongray
 
Posts: 87
Joined: Thu May 27, 2004 1:06 am
Location: MN, USA

Re: Are you thinking of a trip to the DMV impound lot?

Postby Wendor » Tue Aug 24, 2004 4:51 pm

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.

Yes, I have read it. I find it to be patently ridiculous and completely in conflict with the requirements for usage of the land as set by the BLM. That's what I mean by "you have no facts". All you are presenting is your own personal dreams without bothering to do any research whatsoever as to feasibility or workability. That makes your suggestions less than useless.

As to suggestions for improving the DMV system you are again making unwarranted assumptions without facts. Namely, you are assuming that there is something wrong with the current system and that it needs improvement. While that may prove to be true once the facts have been examined, it is most certainly not yet evident.

You assume that just because a handful of people are unhappy with something, that it automatically needs to be changed. In reality the best solution might just be to not change anything and let the people who don't like it go elsewhere. Either way it is better to wait for FACTS to back the desicion rather than taking your "knee jerk, uninformed reactions and assumptions presented as if they were facts" attitude.

You say that "I believing any denial without giving a specific cause on why it was denied, is unreasonable." without bothering to learn that this is the EXACT method that has been in place for years. The vast majority of vehicles rejected by the DMV in the past have had NO explanation whatsoever, nor has there EVER been an "appeals process" in place either. The only real change for this year is that the rejections are taking place EARLY enough that people have a forum to vent their frustrations where in the past they had to wait and get rejected on the playa.

You claim that "This is a great loss, and may take a few years to repair unless something radical is done to prove things will be better next year." but again have nothing but speculation for your claim. I say that there might not be ANY damage and that the facts may show that nothing needs to change. The difference is that I'm willing to wait and see what the evidence shows before reaching a conclusion and you'd rather start with the conclusion. You've already decided that something is broken, in need of repair, and are starting on repair plans...all without waiting to see if there is actually a problem in the first place.

But here's the key: You say "Especially as I believed Burningman was about the freedom to express your creativity and art."
That right there shows your problem. You have made assumptions about "What Burnign Man is about" without bothering to check them. It is most certainly *NOT* about unrestricted freedom to express your creativity and art. You can even ask the organizers if you are unclear about this. There are *MANY* restrictions on art and creativity at Burning Man (of which the mutant vehicle requirements are only a tiny piece). For example if your "art" involves firearms or explosives you must choose a different venue. If your "art" requires complete freedom for where and how you place it you must choose a different venue. If your "art" involves damage to the playa you must choose a differtent venue. You may not like these restrictions, but they are not going to go away. If you dislike them too much, you can always organize your own event using your own standards.

You then say "Obviously I was mistaken!" but in an apparently sarcastic manner since you follow with "BUT I want things to be corrected." What makes you think that ANYTHING needs to be "corrected" except for your own misconceptions of "What Burning Man is about"?

But hey, you're not the first fool to ignore what the organizers have said (without even asking them), decide on your own that your opinion of what Burning Man is about should be forced upon everyone else, and demand that the event be changed to meet your personal ideals.
You won't be the last fool to do so.
Wendor
 
Posts: 42
Joined: Fri Jun 11, 2004 6:48 pm

Postby theBrooke » Tue Aug 24, 2004 5:35 pm

I will pedal as I wish as well. I understand it kicks up dust, what doesn't? I'm not going out there trying to kick up dust mind you, but I ride my bike quite a bit in the summer and whatever speed I can reach on my one speed cruiser (aluminum ;)) I will.

Random story : One day last year my girlfriend and I got caught in some serious wind on our bikes. We could still see fine but it was hard going in the direction we were traversing... So we decided best to go where the wind took us, that lead to quite the adventure.

How many days?

Brooke

ps - Yes I would like to see the impound lot too!
=(*o*)=(^-^)=(º0º)=(*.*)=(^_^)=(*_*)=
User avatar
theBrooke
 
Posts: 89
Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2003 11:04 am
Location: Los Angeles...

Postby unjonharley » Tue Aug 24, 2004 6:34 pm

Wendor the Wind bag. Give yourself a rest. My god if knew half of what think you do...... I'd be one smart ass.
I'm the contraptioneer your mother warned you about.
User avatar
unjonharley
 
Posts: 10023
Joined: Tue Sep 09, 2003 11:05 am
Location: Salem Or.

Postby Badger » Tue Aug 24, 2004 7:15 pm

...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.


A trip to the impound lot is not likely to shed any light on the subject. The impound lot has been established for people who've either made no effort to register their modified vehicle or haven't bothered (ATVs, scooters, mopeds, gas powered go-carts, etc. Granted a few, people who refused to heed the reply DMV e-mailed to all persons seeking a license may end up there but the impound lot is pretty much for 1) vehicles who fuck up while in BRC (altered drivers, no license, recklessness, etc.) and 2) people trying to enter BRC with unmodified vehicles but unwilling/inable to return the vehicle from its place of origin.

It's why my suggestion is to allow all vehicles next year,


Its NOT gonna happen. Idealistic as it may sound given your obvious lack of experience in dealing with the scores of irresponsible drivers, most folks in the Rnagers and DMV have better things to do than spend our volunteer time at the event chasing down asshats who refuse to adhere to the established policy for vehicles. When your volunteer base is small enough that several scores of people each night tax your available resources to the detriment of everyone else it's time to call them on it. The somewhat draconian gate measures which insure that no unregistered vehicles get through the gate and into the city is the first layer of assuring a repeat of last year doesn't take place. Its not the fix-all but instead, represents a layered approach in insuring that most vehicles who enter with no intention of registering get stopped before they get in. What I find fairly remarkable throughout this thread is the seeming lack of concern or considertaion for the vast majority of participants who elect to NOT involve themselves with motor driven vehicles during their time at BRC. I mean, seriously. The acrimony expressed to date suggests to me that just like the rest of American society, people see operation of vehicles as a damn right - to the exclusion of all others. A fucking entitlement. Personally, I think its bullshit.

BTW, its not a good idea to venture out to the impound lot as it remains beyond the boundary of BRC and doing so makes you liable for any fines that the BLM can and probably will assess for venturing out into the buffer zone.
.
Desert dogs drink deep.

Image
.
User avatar
Badger
 
Posts: 3322
Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2003 2:43 pm
Location: San Francisco

Head in the sand!

Postby bdongray » Wed Aug 25, 2004 2:19 am

You are right, I saw no irresponsible driving, except for the incident with a bicycle and my friend. I am not denying there was no irresponsible driving, but (in my friends case) the problem was not with the bicycle, but the rider. Yet the DMV changed to limit the vehicles, and do not hear of anything to address the problem of driver behavior. 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.

An alternative solution could be to require all entrants to show picture ID, and to deny access to previous years offenders.

By the way, I do not intend to unofficially venture out to the impound lot, but to ask the proper channels to do this. I think a trip <b>will</b> shed a lot of light on the issue if there are many very good works of art out there. It also <b>will</b> shed a lot of light if it is purely golf carts and ATVs. 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.

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. 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?
--
Bryan
User avatar
bdongray
 
Posts: 87
Joined: Thu May 27, 2004 1:06 am
Location: MN, USA

Postby Gothalot » Wed Aug 25, 2004 7:10 am

[quote="theBrooke"]I will pedal as I wish as well. I understand it kicks up dust, what doesn't? I'm not going out there trying to kick up dust mind you, but I ride my bike quite a bit in the summer and whatever speed I can reach on my one speed cruiser (aluminum ;)) I will.

BROOKE, Im not flaming you here however your statement "I will pedal as I wish as well " does insinuate you have little care or concideration for others. It shows an arrogance that perhapse all that is important to you is that you go fast on your bike when you can get enough speed up and be damned anyone in your way.

As a society have we lost our way in respecting our fellow humans?
User avatar
Gothalot
 
Posts: 241
Joined: Tue Sep 02, 2003 12:22 pm
Location: Los Angeles

Re: Head in the sand!

Postby Wendor » Wed Aug 25, 2004 9:11 am

bdongray wrote: Yet the DMV changed to limit the vehicles, and do not hear of anything to address the problem of driver behavior.

Have you asked? No.
Have you done ANY research to find out? No.
There are policies in place to handle "driver behavior" and have been for years. But you, as seems to be normal for you, have assumed that just because you haven't seen it...it must not exist.



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.

Since there is no speed limit for bicycles, how can he be breaking it?
Once again you are making foolish assumptions. In this case your assumption is that there is a speed limit currently in place for bicycles.
You complain of heavy-handedness but now want to start enforcing imaginary rules you made up on your own in addition to the real ones.


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.

Wow...postings and discussions. Well, how can facts possibly compete with those. Of course in these discussions and postings you have not been privy to any of the actual facts, just the unhappy artists venting their frustrations. Heck, 3 of the 4 didn't even provide pictures of their vehicles for you to base your call of "unresonable denial" on.

So far you have had a small number of people complain that their mutant vehicles have been denied. But as Badger has pointed out, you have ignored everyone else. So you have concluded that there is a problem and that the current system doesn't work and that the DMV is heavy-handed based on:
1. One half of one percent of the people who applied to the DMV and were then unhappy with their denials.
2. One seventy-fifth of one percent of the population of BRC.


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.

How many times does it have to be repeated for it to sink in? The issue is not whether or not the Ranges can handle the situation. The issue is that our land use permit REQUIRES us to restrict motor vehicle usage on the playa. Wishing it was different won't help any more than wishing gravity would shut off for a while.

The ONLY choices available are:
1. Heavily restrict motor vehicle usage
2. Allow *NO* motor vehicle usage.



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 current design (circle) minimizes the distance between points in the city. So you want to handle the fact that things are too far apart by making them FARTHER apart? Right.

Of course we don't even have to speculate whether or not this suggestion would work. You see, this is exactly how Burning Man worked BEFORE the changes that resulted in the current design of the city and the DMV. Changes that were made specifically to REDUCE the amount of motor vehicle usage. Going back to the previous system would therefore require MORE motor vehicle usage and therefore be a non-option because of the land use permit.
Wendor
 
Posts: 42
Joined: Fri Jun 11, 2004 6:48 pm

Postby Ivy » Wed Aug 25, 2004 9:25 am

I was under the impression that

"The speed limit in Black Rock City is 5 MPH"


(as listed on the website, in the Survial Guide, etc)

applied to everything in the entire city (cars, bikes, feet, et. al.)



Can any authority clarify?
User avatar
Ivy
 
Posts: 979
Joined: Tue Sep 02, 2003 8:20 pm
Location: Long Beach, CA

Postby Badger » Wed Aug 25, 2004 9:41 am

But in a larger city (eg one of 30,000 people) motorized transportation becomes a necessity.


Cites?
.
Desert dogs drink deep.

Image
.
User avatar
Badger
 
Posts: 3322
Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2003 2:43 pm
Location: San Francisco

Postby theBrooke » Wed Aug 25, 2004 10:05 am

Gothalot - To clarify, I think it's ridiculous to even suggest restricting bike speed. Now, I understand you don't know me (damn internet!) but I am a very kind human with nothing but respect for those around me. If I'm on the esplanade, I chill out and cruise slow with foot traffic. I don't want to hurt anyone, and I look out for others. BUT, let me loose out on the open playa in the daytime of course and I will take off like a speed demon... Visibility permiting. Night riding is a whole different issue, SLOW and lit up like a christmas tree

;) Brooke
=(*o*)=(^-^)=(º0º)=(*.*)=(^_^)=(*_*)=
User avatar
theBrooke
 
Posts: 89
Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2003 11:04 am
Location: Los Angeles...

Postby Gothalot » Wed Aug 25, 2004 10:16 am

You don't want to hurt anyone? I wish I could say that. There was one pric% on a moter ped think wearing a top hat that was a complete a-hole. Him I wana hurt.

No worries though. I guess what it comes to is common sense while driving anything anywhere.
User avatar
Gothalot
 
Posts: 241
Joined: Tue Sep 02, 2003 12:22 pm
Location: Los Angeles

Next

Return to 2004 Camps, Art & Activities

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests