If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Slate)   An app that lets you auction off the public parking spot you're currently occupying to the highest bidder who wants it? Yes, it appears that San Francisco does have a problem with that   (slate.com) divider line 138
    More: Stupid, parking spot  
•       •       •

4077 clicks; posted to Main » on 25 Jun 2014 at 3:08 PM (9 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



138 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-06-25 03:54:46 PM

Magorn: LeroyBourne: It's really a good idea, they just want their cut.

It's a terrible idea socially, just a very protiable on economically.

I helped run a Burning man offshoot that had a ticket cap due to space limitations and typically sold out all 1500 tickets in matter of minute after they went on sale.  Of course this caused much upset and consternation among the ticketless.   We raised ticket prices $15 to $50 to create a reserve fund to buy land to expand the event at some point but int he meantime the tickets kept selling out faster and faster.


our smart economist friend pointed out that the most beneficial solution to the Org to deal with t\he shortage would be to auction the tickets off pair by pair.   Those most motivated to go would pay a premium to guarantee their attendance, and then ticket prices would fall until they "found their level" based on the current demand.

and technically he was absolutely correct.  It would have maximized "profit" for the 501(c)(3) which would have brought us closer to buying land quicker which in the end benefits everyone.  However Morally/ethically/optically it was an AWFUL solution as it would destroy the core values of radical inclusion and non-commerce the event was founded on, favoring rich burners over poor ones.

Sometimes the optimal economic solution is not the RIGHT one


That comparison seems spot-on, because this app is obviously not breaking any laws, but it's monetizing dickishness.

People talk about "selling a parking space", but that's just a metaphor. (We have well-defined procedures for registering and transferring the ownership of land; none of that is happening here.) This is about the guy who has a public spot that he doesn't need. Before this app, he leaves. With the app, he overstays the time he needs it for (but not the legal max for the spot) until somebody pays him.

No laws broken. I have a right to the spot. I have a right to communicate my plans with others. There's no law (yet) about them paying me to exercise my free choice. But. . . it's obnoxious. And, as many have pointed out, it creates the new, parasitic, line of work where you occupy a space until you're paid to move.
 
2014-06-25 03:55:45 PM

All2morrowsparTs: jigger: HotWingConspiracy: jigger: All2morrowsparTs: jigger: cgraves67: You're not paying them for the spot. You're paying for them to get out of it.

Exactly. And that's why the law doesn't apply and the C&D letter is without merit.

The law is about profiting off public land.

No one is buying selling or leasing property except for the city. The app users are coordinating their parking together. The time at which you leave a parking space is not public property.

They're attempting to sell access to public land. This is not a clever defense.

Ridiculous. They are selling information, not the land.

They are brokering the use of the land. They are not only giving information but also holding that space until the buyer enters it.


They paid the meter. They are within the time limit. They can stay parked until the time limit is up (or until they would like to leave the spot to someone else of their choosing.)
 
2014-06-25 03:57:31 PM

jigger: HotWingConspiracy: jigger: HotWingConspiracy: jigger: All2morrowsparTs: jigger: cgraves67: You're not paying them for the spot. You're paying for them to get out of it.

Exactly. And that's why the law doesn't apply and the C&D letter is without merit.

The law is about profiting off public land.

No one is buying selling or leasing property except for the city. The app users are coordinating their parking together. The time at which you leave a parking space is not public property.

They're attempting to sell access to public land. This is not a clever defense.

Ridiculous. They are selling information, not the land.

Can you get on to the land without paying them? They're selling access to something they don't own.

Yes, you can get onto the land without paying them.


Not if they won't move you can't.

They can't park there forever. There are time limits on these spots. Anyone parking there has paid to be parked there.

What's stopping them from paying for a bit more? If the bidding that day is good, the math can work out.

 As long as they are within the time limit, they have the right to park there and leave whenever it benefits them to do so.

 They're attempting to sell access to public land.
 
2014-06-25 04:00:41 PM
All2morrowsparTs:
The law is about profiting off public land.

What law forbids profiting off public land? Was Ansel Adams prosecuted after he sold photos of national parks? Can't you pay a tour guide to talk about Independence Hall?

It seems like a good idea to ban this specific behavior, but there's nothing wrong with people who break no laws profiting from things done on public land.
 
2014-06-25 04:00:57 PM

Warlordtrooper: No they aren't they are simply selling information about when they are leaving a parking spot.  They are not selling access to the land, rather knowledge of they are done parking their car.


I'll sell you vital information about whether or not I'll be beating you up tomorrow for $100. I'm just selling access to knowledge!
 
2014-06-25 04:02:01 PM

Captain Horatio Mindblower: It seems like a good idea to ban this specific behavior, but there's nothing wrong with people who break no laws profiting from things done on public land.


You're not very good at playing lawyer.
 
2014-06-25 04:03:48 PM
Anyone who thinks some clever word use suddenly makes this legal ought to try explaining it to a judge. "Well your honour, I was just selling information on when I'd be leaving, nothing more."
 
2014-06-25 04:05:02 PM

HotWingConspiracy: jigger: HotWingConspiracy: jigger: HotWingConspiracy: jigger: All2morrowsparTs: jigger: cgraves67: You're not paying them for the spot. You're paying for them to get out of it.

Exactly. And that's why the law doesn't apply and the C&D letter is without merit.

The law is about profiting off public land.

No one is buying selling or leasing property except for the city. The app users are coordinating their parking together. The time at which you leave a parking space is not public property.

They're attempting to sell access to public land. This is not a clever defense.

Ridiculous. They are selling information, not the land.

Can you get on to the land without paying them? They're selling access to something they don't own.

Yes, you can get onto the land without paying them.

Not if they won't move you can't.


So how is that different than before? You could ask him nicely to move and it's up to him whether to move or not. You could offer him a delicious candy bar as incentive to move. You could ask him nicely and slip him a 10 spot.

They can't park there forever. There are time limits on these spots. Anyone parking there has paid to be parked there.

What's stopping them from paying for a bit more? If the bidding that day is good, the math can work out.

 As long as they are within the time limit, they have the right to park there and leave whenever it benefits them to do so.

 They're attempting to sell access to public land.


You said that before. Repeating the same argument doesn't support it. As long as the meter is running and the time limit has not been reached, the person parked in that spot has an exclusive right to park in that spot and can leave when he wants and for whatever reason he wants. Whether it's that he has to go, or he just wants to be nice, or someone paid him $10 to do so, it doesn't matter.
 
2014-06-25 04:06:59 PM

Russ1642: some clever word use


In other words, law.
 
2014-06-25 04:07:23 PM

evil saltine: Warlordtrooper: No they aren't they are simply selling information about when they are leaving a parking spot. They are not selling access to the land, rather knowledge of they are done parking their car.

No, they're soliciting payment to move their car at a certain time. It's not "pay $10.00 to find out I'm leaving at 4:30" it's "pay $10.00 to get me to leave now".


I love how people think that someohow just so long as they phrase something properly the illegal suddenly becomes legal.  This sort fo "magic words" theroy of the law is what the whole sovereign citizen movement is based on too.   Intent matters in the law.  The Law prohbits a private person from profiting from their use of public land without proper permits,   whether you claim they are "selling access" (which they manifestly are) or selling information about when a space is vacant, they are STILL profiting by virtue of their use of public land.

the solution is actually very simple though.

Implement a "cool down" on public parking spaces so it is not legal to park in them until after they have been fully vacant for at least 5 minutes.
 
2014-06-25 04:09:16 PM

ZAZ: AlgaeRancher: oh sure its all fun and games, until the city council decides to do this for every public parking spot in the city.

There is a movement to implement market rate street parking nationwide. The federal DOT is paying for demonstration projects.  Donald Shoup at UCLA is the guy credited with the concept (but not necessarily the implementation).


I Googled him and found this, but it can't be read without sending the reader to sleep. What does it all mean?
 
2014-06-25 04:09:53 PM

jigger: Russ1642: some clever word use

In other words, law.


No, Law the way people that don;t actually know or understand the law imagine it to be....

big difference, ends up with a lot of people in jail because they think they can ignore a court orderi f the judge happens to have a gold fringe on the flag flying in his courtroom since that somehow makes it an Admiralty court without jurisdiction on dry land
 
2014-06-25 04:10:09 PM
Assuming these are parallel parking spots, I get the app, monitor the auctions, and position my car immediately behind the auctioneer and wait for him to pull out. Thank you for the free spot.
 
2014-06-25 04:12:36 PM
Find the car in question.

Slash its tires or scratch it deep.

/fark you

fozziewazzi: Assuming these are parallel parking spots, I get the app, monitor the auctions, and position my car immediately behind the auctioneer and wait for him to pull out. Thank you for the free spot.


o_O

Didn't you have a "free spot" when you were behind him? And open one up when you moved forward?
 
2014-06-25 04:15:17 PM

ArcadianRefugee: Find the car in question.

Slash its tires or scratch it deep.

/fark you

fozziewazzi: Assuming these are parallel parking spots, I get the app, monitor the auctions, and position my car immediately behind the auctioneer and wait for him to pull out. Thank you for the free spot.

o_O

Didn't you have a "free spot" when you were behind him? And open one up when you moved forward?


No, I'm double parked behind him.
 
2014-06-25 04:28:22 PM

Magorn: I love how people think that someohow just so long as they phrase something properly the illegal suddenly becomes legal.


That's what you're doing to try to make it illegal.

Magorn: jigger: Russ1642: some clever word use

In other words, law.

No, Law the way people that don;t actually know or understand the law imagine it to be....

big difference, ends up with a lot of people in jail because they think they can ignore a court orderi f the judge happens to have a gold fringe on the flag flying in his courtroom since that somehow makes it an Admiralty court without jurisdiction on dry land


Are you seriously saying that playing around with the meanings of words is NOT almost the entire basis for the legal industry and the judicial branch of government?
 
2014-06-25 04:29:47 PM
jigger:

No one is buying selling or leasing property except for the city. The app users are coordinating their parking together. The time at which you leave a parking space is not public property.

That is such amazing horseshiat.
Tell me, do your q-tips come out brown?
 
2014-06-25 04:30:43 PM

strathmeyer: Captain Horatio Mindblower: It seems like a good idea to ban this specific behavior, but there's nothing wrong with people who break no laws profiting from things done on public land.

You're not very good at playing lawyer.


I stipulate that I'm not very good at anything (also, I'm ugly, and my mother dresses me funny), but I observe that you give no opposing argument or counterexample. Have at it, if you can.
 
2014-06-25 04:31:41 PM

Captain Horatio Mindblower: MythDragon: This is how I see it working:
Guy 4: I won't spend 5 minutes beating your car with a claw hammer.

Ten minutes!


But then you still get the 5 minute car massage. It's better than 10 minutes, but you still lose out. This has become a senario in which there is no winning move.

/Only winning move is not to play
 
2014-06-25 04:33:10 PM

gunther_bumpass: jigger:

No one is buying selling or leasing property except for the city. The app users are coordinating their parking together. The time at which you leave a parking space is not public property.

That is such amazing horseshiat.
Tell me, do your q-tips come out brown?


 I guess can't argue with such a detailed and well-cited rebuttal as that.
 
2014-06-25 04:35:57 PM
If this is technically legal at the moment, this seems like an excellent impetus to write a law making it illegal.
 
2014-06-25 04:37:20 PM

iheartscotch: Maybe they should, you know, create adequate parking facilities and this wouldn't be a thing.


Just wondering if you've ever been to San Francisco. It's a city built at the end of a small peninsula. There really aren't many options when it comes to expanding to create more parking.

Warlordtrooper: Making money is only for the rich.  The little guy has no right to try and make money!  That's what this all comes down too.  Some guy found a way to make a bit of money and the wealthy "job creators" don't like it


Since the developer of the app is getting a cut, and I'm guessing has some money to start with, and may even be bankrolled by investors, I think your argument is invalid. Also, anyone driving in San Francisco with an iPhone is not a "little guy."

Oh, I just found them on AngelList. The CEO and UX Developer both work for a 100+ year old consulting agency. The CEO is from Italy, living in Silicon Valley. The Founder is also from Italy, living in Silicon Valley where he works for another technology consulting firm. Yeah, I'm sure all of those guys are hurting for money.
 
2014-06-25 04:39:44 PM
I'm for keeping it, but only if people who are trying to profit have to put a sticker on their car.  Should end well.

I'm all for Getaround, Lyft, AirBnB, but this is too farking far and it's not your property to sell.  I don't give a crap about it being "selling information" or whatever.  Parking is a shiatstorm here and this only will make it worse.
 
2014-06-25 04:40:23 PM
20 years ago, homeless panhandlers would stand in empty spaces and sell them to people.
 
2014-06-25 04:41:13 PM

shirtsbyeric: 20 years ago, homeless panhandlers would stand in empty spaces and sell them to people.


And that was also illegal.
 
2014-06-25 04:41:37 PM
What are the ridiculously expensive pay lots going to do about this? Everywhere I've ever been the whisper is always that they're owned by the mob. Even in South Carolina, an area without any mob presence, everyone still "knows" that those private parking lots are run by the mob. They don't recover a lot of bodies from under the bridges in San Francisco, do they?
 
2014-06-25 04:42:19 PM

Magorn: LeroyBourne: It's really a good idea, they just want their cut.

It's a terrible idea socially, just a very protiable on economically.

I helped run a Burning man offshoot that had a ticket cap due to space limitations and typically sold out all 1500 tickets in matter of minute after they went on sale.  Of course this caused much upset and consternation among the ticketless.   We raised ticket prices $15 to $50 to create a reserve fund to buy land to expand the event at some point but int he meantime the tickets kept selling out faster and faster.


our smart economist friend pointed out that the most beneficial solution to the Org to deal with t\he shortage would be to auction the tickets off pair by pair.   Those most motivated to go would pay a premium to guarantee their attendance, and then ticket prices would fall until they "found their level" based on the current demand.

and technically he was absolutely correct.  It would have maximized "profit" for the 501(c)(3) which would have brought us closer to buying land quicker which in the end benefits everyone.  However Morally/ethically/optically it was an AWFUL solution as it would destroy the core values of radical inclusion and non-commerce the event was founded on, favoring rich burners over poor ones.

Sometimes the optimal economic solution is not the RIGHT one


I see what you're saying.  I just meant it's a good idea for some people wanting to make a quick tax free buck.  If I'm willing to pay top dollar for a public spot, then what's the problem?  I would never do that, but  someone might.  And the city is just chapped about not getting cut out of the racket.
 
2014-06-25 04:45:21 PM

Splish: What are the ridiculously expensive pay lots going to do about this? Everywhere I've ever been the whisper is always that they're owned by the mob. Even in South Carolina, an area without any mob presence, everyone still "knows" that those private parking lots are run by the mob. They don't recover a lot of bodies from under the bridges in San Francisco, do they?


In many parts of SF, they don't even have lots to fall back on when you can't find street parking, which BTW is $4 an hour in most areas.  Better have a shiat-ton of quarters in your car.  I love this city dearly, but parking, and driving on or near Market can be soul-crushing.
 
2014-06-25 04:46:46 PM

jigger: HotWingConspiracy: jigger: All2morrowsparTs: jigger: cgraves67: You're not paying them for the spot. You're paying for them to get out of it.

Exactly. And that's why the law doesn't apply and the C&D letter is without merit.

The law is about profiting off public land.

No one is buying selling or leasing property except for the city. The app users are coordinating their parking together. The time at which you leave a parking space is not public property.

They're attempting to sell access to public land. This is not a clever defense.

Ridiculous. They are selling information, not the land.


Let's just follow this trend to its conclusion then...

- The highest bidder gets to know when I'm going to stand up from this park bench
- The highest bidder gets to know when I'm going to give up my seat on this crowded train/bus
- The highest bidder gets to know when I'm going to leave this spot on the beach
- The highest bidder gets to know when I'm going to be finished drinking from this water fountain
- The highest bidder gets to know when my friends and I are going to be done with this picnic table and grill

Is that a world you want to live in? Is that what the social contract is all about? Are we OK with competing financially against others to use services that we've already paid for in the form of taxes?
 
2014-06-25 04:49:19 PM

shirtsbyeric: 20 years ago, homeless panhandlers would stand in empty spaces and sell them to people.


I'm pretty sure that it was first-come-first-served, and that you weren't required to give them any money. Care to try to make any other comparisons that don't really work?
 
2014-06-25 04:49:37 PM
In DC the homeless do this they will stand in an empty spot and demand money for you to park there.
 
2014-06-25 04:49:49 PM

NorCalLos: Sure; but if there's a legitimate use for the app, it's not fair to shut the whole thing down.


The city doesn't have to shut down the app. They just need to enforce their ordinance. App users can take a chance of whether they're going to get cited for using the app, just as they take a chance whether they'll get caught speeding or a tail light burning out.
 
2014-06-25 04:52:47 PM

lostcat: jigger: HotWingConspiracy: jigger: All2morrowsparTs: jigger: cgraves67: You're not paying them for the spot. You're paying for them to get out of it.

Exactly. And that's why the law doesn't apply and the C&D letter is without merit.

The law is about profiting off public land.

No one is buying selling or leasing property except for the city. The app users are coordinating their parking together. The time at which you leave a parking space is not public property.

They're attempting to sell access to public land. This is not a clever defense.

Ridiculous. They are selling information, not the land.

Let's just follow this trend to its conclusion then...

- The highest bidder gets to know when I'm going to stand up from this park bench
- The highest bidder gets to know when I'm going to give up my seat on this crowded train/bus
- The highest bidder gets to know when I'm going to leave this spot on the beach
- The highest bidder gets to know when I'm going to be finished drinking from this water fountain
- The highest bidder gets to know when my friends and I are going to be done with this picnic table and grill

Is that a world you want to live in? Is that what the social contract is all about? Are we OK with competing financially against others to use services that we've already paid for in the form of taxes?


The thread should end here, but it won't. Said more eloquently than I could have.
 
2014-06-25 04:53:22 PM

jigger: gunther_bumpass: jigger:

No one is buying selling or leasing property except for the city. The app users are coordinating their parking together. The time at which you leave a parking space is not public property.

That is such amazing horseshiat.
Tell me, do your q-tips come out brown?

 I guess can't argue with such a detailed and well-cited rebuttal as that.


You can't argue with the actual rebuttals, either. FFS I was lobbing it to you and you dropped it.
 
2014-06-25 05:01:55 PM

ArcadianRefugee: Didn't you have a "free spot" when you were behind him? And open one up when you moved forward?


"Standing" or waiting in a traffic lane isn't parking.   But it might be blocking traffic is done for too long.

/Arrange to be waiting directly next to the auctioneer.   Become  motivated to move on when the winner shows by receiving a cut.
 
2014-06-25 05:03:35 PM
It seems like it would be easy to kill this app by getting PayPal/Visa/Mastercard to blacklist it.
 
2014-06-25 05:18:39 PM

jigger: HotWingConspiracy: jigger: HotWingConspiracy: jigger: HotWingConspiracy: jigger: All2morrowsparTs: jigger: cgraves67: You're not paying them for the spot. You're paying for them to get out of it.

Exactly. And that's why the law doesn't apply and the C&D letter is without merit.

The law is about profiting off public land.

No one is buying selling or leasing property except for the city. The app users are coordinating their parking together. The time at which you leave a parking space is not public property.

They're attempting to sell access to public land. This is not a clever defense.

Ridiculous. They are selling information, not the land.

Can you get on to the land without paying them? They're selling access to something they don't own.

Yes, you can get onto the land without paying them.

Not if they won't move you can't.

So how is that different than before?


LOL. Yeah this scheme is totally common. Happens all the time.

 You could ask him nicely to move and it's up to him whether to move or not. You could offer him a delicious candy bar as incentive to move. You could ask him nicely and slip him a 10 spot.

Parking your car isn't a farking profit center, the space isn't yours to sell.

They can't park there forever. There are time limits on these spots. Anyone parking there has paid to be parked there.

What's stopping them from paying for a bit more? If the bidding that day is good, the math can work out.

 As long as they are within the time limit, they have the right to park there and leave whenever it benefits them to do so.


And these people are attempting to build an incentive for sitting there until someone gives you a 20 spot for access to the space. They cannot charge for access to something owned by the public.

 They're attempting to sell access to public land.

You said that before. Repeating the same argument doesn't support it.


And you keep repeating that they're just selling information. How's that going?

As long as the meter is running and the time limit has not been reached, the person parked in that spot has an exclusive right to park in that spot and can leave when he wants and for whatever reason he wants. Whether it's that he has to go, or he just wants to be nice, or someone paid him $10 to do so, it doesn't matter.

You're living in a fantasy land.  They're attempting to sell access to public land.
 
2014-06-25 05:26:37 PM
The space on the street in front of your house or driveway is public land.  This is pretty easy to follow.

They can rent out their actual private off-street parking if they like, and there is an app for that in SF.
 
2014-06-25 05:26:53 PM

namatad: Highest bidder gets the parking spot.


I actually wouldn't mind demand-based pricing for parking.  I try to put off any trips to the nearby campus until slow times in the week (Friday morning - yes please) or lulls in the academic calendar, and it does irritate me to pay the same rate even when there's almost no one there but the meter maids.  I usually just walk the five blocks from a free lot I have access to, but sometimes I do have appointments to keep - and I'm not well known for arriving when I intend to.
 
2014-06-25 05:30:03 PM

lostcat: jigger: HotWingConspiracy: jigger: All2morrowsparTs: jigger: cgraves67: You're not paying them for the spot. You're paying for them to get out of it.

Exactly. And that's why the law doesn't apply and the C&D letter is without merit.

The law is about profiting off public land.

No one is buying selling or leasing property except for the city. The app users are coordinating their parking together. The time at which you leave a parking space is not public property.

They're attempting to sell access to public land. This is not a clever defense.

Ridiculous. They are selling information, not the land.

Let's just follow this trend to its conclusion then...

- The highest bidder gets to know when I'm going to stand up from this park bench
- The highest bidder gets to know when I'm going to give up my seat on this crowded train/bus
- The highest bidder gets to know when I'm going to leave this spot on the beach
- The highest bidder gets to know when I'm going to be finished drinking from this water fountain
- The highest bidder gets to know when my friends and I are going to be done with this picnic table and grill

Is that a world you want to live in? Is that what the social contract is all about? Are we OK with competing financially against others to use services that we've already paid for in the form of taxes?


Damn that's a splendid idea. Everyone look out for the next app -BeachBummer..I'll agree to give up my prime spot on the public beach to the highest bidder. You're not paying for the spot, you're just 'paying me to leave'.
 
2014-06-25 05:37:25 PM

Magorn: evil saltine: Warlordtrooper: No they aren't they are simply selling information about when they are leaving a parking spot. They are not selling access to the land, rather knowledge of they are done parking their car.

No, they're soliciting payment to move their car at a certain time. It's not "pay $10.00 to find out I'm leaving at 4:30" it's "pay $10.00 to get me to leave now".

I love how people think that someohow just so long as they phrase something properly the illegal suddenly becomes legal.  This sort fo "magic words" theroy of the law is what the whole sovereign citizen movement is based on too.   Intent matters in the law.  The Law prohbits a private person from profiting from their use of public land without proper permits,   whether you claim they are "selling access" (which they manifestly are) or selling information about when a space is vacant, they are STILL profiting by virtue of their use of public land.

the solution is actually very simple though.

Implement a "cool down" on public parking spaces so it is not legal to park in them until after they have been fully vacant for at least 5 minutes.



Until it doesn't.  See:  Felony murder or Aaron Swartz or any other absurd interpretations of the computer fraud and abuse law.

So which is it.  Does intent matter or not, the government likes to pick and choose when it does.
 
2014-06-25 05:38:57 PM
If only the app did transactions only in bitcoin this wouldn't be a controvery.

Because its not money, ergo no profiting off public land.
 
2014-06-25 05:41:46 PM

lostcat: jigger: HotWingConspiracy: jigger: All2morrowsparTs: jigger: cgraves67: You're not paying them for the spot. You're paying for them to get out of it.

Exactly. And that's why the law doesn't apply and the C&D letter is without merit.

The law is about profiting off public land.

No one is buying selling or leasing property except for the city. The app users are coordinating their parking together. The time at which you leave a parking space is not public property.

They're attempting to sell access to public land. This is not a clever defense.

Ridiculous. They are selling information, not the land.

Let's just follow this trend to its conclusion then...

- The highest bidder gets to know when I'm going to stand up from this park bench
- The highest bidder gets to know when I'm going to give up my seat on this crowded train/bus
- The highest bidder gets to know when I'm going to leave this spot on the beach
- The highest bidder gets to know when I'm going to be finished drinking from this water fountain
- The highest bidder gets to know when my friends and I are going to be done with this picnic table and grill

Is that a world you want to live in? Is that what the social contract is all about? Are we OK with competing financially against others to use services that we've already paid for in the form of taxes?


So basically, the person with the most money gets anything he wants.
How is that different from what we have now?
 
2014-06-25 05:43:50 PM
jnapier:

So basically, the person with the most money gets anything he wants.
How is that different from what we have now?


The person with the most money doesn't use public services, so it's just us peons who rely on first-come-first-serve to keep social unrest at bay.
 
2014-06-25 05:47:14 PM

NorCalLos: thaylin: NorCalLos: I didn't RTFA; but it seems to me that what you're selling is exclusive information about when a particular spot will be vacant. Seems legit to me.

So you travel around and pull into a vacant spot, using it up, but only so you can auction it off to someone else. That is not legit.

Sure; but if there's a legitimate use for the app, it's not fair to shut the whole thing down.


So if the majority of its use are illegitimate, and there is no way to regulate those uses, and there is only one minor legitimate use and it is barely being use for that, then yes it is.
 
2014-06-25 05:48:52 PM

cgraves67: You're not paying them for the spot. You're paying for them to get out of it.


Technically you are paying to be the FIRST to see them leave the spot.
 
2014-06-25 05:49:39 PM
I'm okay with this. City is just mad that they didn't think of it or how to tax it first.
 
2014-06-25 05:50:47 PM
This what driverless google cars are for - finding and hoarding prime parking spots - until the Silicon Valley billionaire gets home from work.
 
2014-06-25 05:52:30 PM

jigger: HotWingConspiracy: jigger: HotWingConspiracy: jigger: HotWingConspiracy: jigger: All2morrowsparTs: jigger: cgraves67: You're not paying them for the spot. You're paying for them to get out of it.

Exactly. And that's why the law doesn't apply and the C&D letter is without merit.

The law is about profiting off public land.

No one is buying selling or leasing property except for the city. The app users are coordinating their parking together. The time at which you leave a parking space is not public property.

They're attempting to sell access to public land. This is not a clever defense.

Ridiculous. They are selling information, not the land.

Can you get on to the land without paying them? They're selling access to something they don't own.

Yes, you can get onto the land without paying them.

Not if they won't move you can't.

So how is that different than before? You could ask him nicely to move and it's up to him whether to move or not. You could offer him a delicious candy bar as incentive to move. You could ask him nicely and slip him a 10 spot.

They can't park there forever. There are time limits on these spots. Anyone parking there has paid to be parked there.

What's stopping them from paying for a bit more? If the bidding that day is good, the math can work out.

 As long as they are within the time limit, they have the right to park there and leave whenever it benefits them to do so.

 They're attempting to sell access to public land.

You said that before. Repeating the same argument doesn't support it. As long as the meter is running and the time limit has not been reached, the person parked in that spot has an exclusive right to park in that spot and can leave when he wants and for whatever reason he wants. Whether it's that he has to go, or he just wants to be nice, or someone paid him $10 to do so, it doesn't matter.



It does matter. They are creating a public nuisance at the very best, and they are still profiting off the public property. If not for the ap they would have left at say 9, now they are staying till much later solely based off the app and making money for the spot. If it was just telling them when they were leaving I would not care much, but you cannot regulate that, and they are staying late, using more of the public's resources to make a buck for themselves.
 
2014-06-25 05:58:58 PM

lostcat: shirtsbyeric: 20 years ago, homeless panhandlers would stand in empty spaces and sell them to people.

I'm pretty sure that it was first-come-first-served, and that you weren't required to give them any money. Care to try to make any other comparisons that don't really work?


And you are also not technically required to give these guys any money. The comparison is spot on, jsut because a 1 minor detail, its bidding over first come first serve, is difference does not make it a bad comparison.
 
Displayed 50 of 138 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report