When cities treated cars as dangerous intruders

Re:When cities treated cars as dangerous intruders by kqr on Sunday July 31, 2022 @12:21PM (#32296589)

On the other hand, that's exactly how I would phrase the question if I wanted to prime the survey respondent to get a result biased toward freedoms for unprotected road users.

There's no good reason to phrase the question like that instead of filter the answers after the fact. The only reason is to get people thinking in a certain direction.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:When cities treated cars as dangerous intruders by eropple on Sunday July 31, 2022 @12:25PM (#32296621)

...they do that because if they don't, "protected bike lanes" will be the only thing they hear, and in Cambridge etc. the plans are in the works (slowly, but in the works) to implement them. They're looking for additional things, not the thing that's already in the works but takes time and the progress is non-obvious 'til it's done.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:When cities treated cars as dangerous intruders by kqr on Sunday July 31, 2022 @12:29PM (#32296655)

Then the item should say something to the effect of "You can make more than one suggestion." or even more concretely, "Please suggest your top five, or fewer if you can't think of that many."

[ Parent | on HN ]