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.
Yikes dude, you’re blaming me for the reddit-esque toxicity.
I was using the other guy’s wording (“trash dumping”) specifically in quotes because I didn’t agree with that sentiment re: scooters. I’m not making any point about you, I’m talking about the use of the term NIMBYism. Dang.
You’re right, it’s very NIMBY sounding
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.
Dude honestly sounds proud of being a NIMBY
deleted by creator
I agree that you’re consistent, that’s why I said the strong initial statement sounded hypocritical
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.
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).
deleted by creator
Yikes dude, you’re blaming me for the reddit-esque toxicity.
I was using the other guy’s wording (“trash dumping”) specifically in quotes because I didn’t agree with that sentiment re: scooters. I’m not making any point about you, I’m talking about the use of the term NIMBYism. Dang.
deleted by creator
Those certain contradict your attempt to place a weird limit on for ‘NIMBY’ can be used.