Occupy Wall Street

[Harry]

Originally Posted by MichaelTurner

Certainly, although it is required to stay open 24/7. I also believe that the protesters were not violating any of the rules when they began the protest. I think they later changed the rules (or tried to?) to prohibit stuff like sleeping bags and tents.

I think the 'infringing on others' rights to use the park' is pretty specious too. If anything, it's become an attraction.

And as for the locals who are complaining about the nuisance: Really?? WTF you chose to live in Manhattan. Shit like this happens all the freaking time. It's the busiest city in the nation. Get over yourselves.

Oh please. Sure, it's a tourist attraction, but what about the workers and residents that used to be able to enjoy the park? Now it's a homeless city. No way do people have the right to take up residence in a public park.

And talk about specious arguments, nice last paragraph....

[Harry]

Originally Posted by MichaelTurner

Cool, they set up reasonable rules. Now get rid of the people that can't follow the rules. Tomorrow is going to be fun.

[win diesel]

Originally Posted by MichaelTurner

Certainly, although it is required to stay open 24/7. I also believe that the protesters were not violating any of the rules when they began the protest. I think they later changed the rules (or tried to?) to prohibit stuff like sleeping bags and tents.

I think the 'infringing on others' rights to use the park' is pretty specious too. If anything, it's become an attraction.

And as for the locals who are complaining about the nuisance: Really?? WTF you chose to live in Manhattan. Shit like this happens all the freaking time. It's the busiest city in the nation. Get over yourselves.

I'm not exaggerating when I call these protestors turds because they are literally sleeping in chit

At some point disease could actually set in

[RazorGuns]

If the internet was around in the late 60's....

this is what the comments would look like.

r

[Harry]

Some protesters saw the cleanup as tantamount to an eviction notice, and they vowed to stand their ground, even if it meant being arrested. “This is a public park privately held — I don’t even understand what that means,” Travis Nogle, a 32-year-old protester and “earthship builder” from San Francisco said as he changed his shoes and prepared to pitch in with the cleanup.

http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/20...tive-strategy/

[andyphillips]

Originally Posted by win diesel

I'm not exaggerating when I call these protestors turds because they are literally sleeping in chit

At some point disease could actually set in

And they'll blame Wall St. for getting sick

[MichaelTurner]

Originally Posted by Harry

Oh please. Sure, it's a tourist attraction, but what about the workers and residents that used to be able to enjoy the park?

1) Nobody's preventing them from enjoying the park.
2) The protesters have no less claim to the use of the park than those who live and work in the area.
3) I didn't realize that Zuccotti Park was the only one in NYC.

Now it's a homeless city. No way do people have the right to take up residence in a public park.

False on both accounts.

Originally Posted by Harry

Cool, they set up reasonable rules. Now get rid of the people that can't follow the rules. Tomorrow is going to be fun.

"Reasonable" is subject to interpretation. I'm not going to argue this because I guarantee our opinions differ here.

Originally Posted by win diesel

I'm not exaggerating when I call these protestors turds because they are literally sleeping in chit

At some point disease could actually set in

I haven't been there since the cleanup this morning, but the last time I stopped by, it was messy, but no dirtier than any other city park. I imagine today it's cleaner than it's ever been.

It's also no greater a disease vector than a rush hour subway or a college dorm.

[MichaelTurner]

Originally Posted by Harry

http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/20...tive-strategy/

Yes, Harry, there are plenty of crazies. That doesn't invalidate the protest.

[Harry]

.

Originally Posted by MichaelTurner

1) Nobody's preventing them from enjoying the park. yes they are - there isn't room to walk or sit in the park, and it stinks like sh*t
2) The protesters have no less claim to the use of the park than those who live and work in the area. They don't have the right to use it any way they feel like using it. There are rules.
3) I didn't realize that Zuccotti Park was the only one in NYC. Who said it was?

False on both accounts. People set up tents and are living there - a homeless city, tent city, whatever you want to call it, people are living there - they don't have the right to take up residence on someone else's property or a public park

"Reasonable" is subject to interpretation. I'm not going to argue this because I guarantee our opinions differ here.
I haven't been there since the cleanup this morning, but the last time I stopped by, it was messy, but no dirtier than any other city park. I imagine today it's cleaner than it's ever been. lol

It's also no greater a disease vector than a rush hour subway or a college dorm. people aren't sh*tting on the subways, but they are gross too so that's not much of an achievement. and public parks/someone else's property shouldn't be equated with those things you mention

[Pseudolus]

Originally Posted by MichaelTurner

"Reasonable" is subject to interpretation.

I think what it comes down to is that "make views known" is perfectly okee-fine, but "occupy" is not. So if you think that not being allowed to occupy a park is unreasonable, then, yeah, you're not going to like the kind of rules the rest of us think are necessary to running a park.

(How freaking entitlement-minded is it to think they should have a right to "occupy" that space to begin with? Seriously.)