Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Judge Rules Milwaukee Flouted U.S. Constitution in Response to Pokemon Go Craze

hollywoodreporter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 81 posts

Re: Judge Rules Milwaukee Flouted U.S. Constitution in Response to Pokemon Go Craze

#21

Post by wfunction »

nemo44x wrote: post #13
wfunction wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> This seems like a legitimate issue though. How do you propose it be solved? > Is the game responsible for people littering? I feel like you didn't answer my question? Edit, to clarify: I'm asking what the actual solution is: expecting the city to pay for skyrocketing enforcement? Or letting the park get trashed and then blaming the citizens? Or just closing the park and blaming people for it happening? etc.

I think they did: > put the blame on the person who does the wrong thing.

How does that answer the question? I'm asking how to solve problem, the response is who needs to receive the blame?

Edit: See edit above. The question isn't whom to blame, the question is how to resolve the issue. Blaming people doesn't generally resolve an issue, but enforcing it or putting in place mechanisms for preventing it or some other tangible action might.

Re: Judge Rules Milwaukee Flouted U.S. Constitution in Response to Pokemon Go Craze

#22

Post by sqeaky »

dragonwriter wrote: post #15
jmcdiesel wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or... we place the blame on being in bad places where the blame belongs. If I throw $10,000 over the white house fence and you jump the fence to get to it, its still YOUR problem and YOU are the one at fault for being where you arent supposed to be. Place the blame on the people who disregard the rules, the game isnt responsible because it placed something there. This would be like... "Hey, you shot a deer in the mid…

> If I throw $10,000 over the white house fence and you jump the fence to get to it, its still YOUR problem and YOU are the one at fault for being where you arent supposed to be. Actually, I'm fairly sure throwing objects over the White House fence without some authority is also illegal, so in your example both parties would legally be at fault.

Somehow, I don't think normal rules apply to people who have enough spare money so that can they toss $10,000 just to see what you will do.

Re: Judge Rules Milwaukee Flouted U.S. Constitution in Response to Pokemon Go Craze

#23

Post by barsonme »

Sleeep wrote: post #17
dragonwriter wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

By enforcing rules against littering, using parks after hours, etc.

They were complaining the enforcement was what was expensive... "It cost the city tens of thousands of dollars in additional law enforcement."

I don't quite understand the issue. It's the government's job to keep up public infrastructure regardless of how heavily it's used—that's something the left _and_ right can agree on.

Re: Judge Rules Milwaukee Flouted U.S. Constitution in Response to Pokemon Go Craze

#24

Post by minikites »

barsonme wrote: post #23
Sleeep wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They were complaining the enforcement was what was expensive... "It cost the city tens of thousands of dollars in additional law enforcement."

I don't quite understand the issue. It's the government's job to keep up public infrastructure regardless of how heavily it's used—that's something the left _and_ right can agree on.

The right does their best to cut government revenue via lower taxes, so how do you propose maintaining infrastructure with less income?

Re: Judge Rules Milwaukee Flouted U.S. Constitution in Response to Pokemon Go Craze

#25

Post by Sleeep »

dragonwriter wrote: post #19
Sleeep wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They were complaining the enforcement was what was expensive... "It cost the city tens of thousands of dollars in additional law enforcement."

Government doesn't have a right to cheap enforcement that trumps rights held by the people, like those protected by the First Amendment.

Yeah, I totally agree with you.

I was just pointing out that "enforcing rules against littering, using parks after hours, etc." isn't the solution to them, they see it as the problem.

Re: Judge Rules Milwaukee Flouted U.S. Constitution in Response to Pokemon Go Craze

#26

Post by patrickmay »

QAPereo wrote: post #5
jmcdiesel wrote: post #3

Funny how for the longest time now, cities and counties take more and more money from public parks citing their underuse... then when they get used, they cry out legally to stop the use. Part of the costs of a park is cleaning up after people, its already in the budget. So is the landscaping. So is the coverage for wear and tear in general. Its also funny to see the difference. National Park Service embraces Pokemon…

I suspect that down the line, some group of clever people will design something like Pokemon GO, but with some real meat on its bones and a long, monetized lifetime. At that point, you have to wonder if there will be a measurable hit on childhood obesity. I suspect there might be, albeit relatively small, still a measurable reduction.

From your lips to Blizzard's ears....

Re: Judge Rules Milwaukee Flouted U.S. Constitution in Response to Pokemon Go Craze

#27

Post by [deleted] »

wfunction wrote: post #21
nemo44x wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think they did: > put the blame on the person who does the wrong thing.

How does that answer the question? I'm asking how to solve problem, the response is who needs to receive the blame? Edit: See edit above. The question isn't whom to blame, the question is how to resolve the issue. Blaming people doesn't generally resolve an issue, but enforcing it or putting in place mechanisms for preventing it or some other tangible action might.

[deleted]

Re: Judge Rules Milwaukee Flouted U.S. Constitution in Response to Pokemon Go Craze

#28

Post by freebirdtoss »

jmcdiesel wrote: post #10
wfunction wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> City officials were aghast at large numbers of individuals playing Pokemon Go who visited parks, littered, trampled grass and flowers, and stayed past park hours. This seems like a legitimate issue though. How do you propose it be solved?

Staying past park hours for the most part is dumb... as far as being a big deal, its not. People walking around trying to play a game after hours is no something that needs policing in the first place... Is the game responsible for people littering? Or tramping grass (seriously, its grass... lets get over ourselves) or flowers... Is the game responsible for that, or are the people who do the wrong thing responsible?…

If parks did not have hours enforced, they would become permanent homeless tent encampments.

Re: Judge Rules Milwaukee Flouted U.S. Constitution in Response to Pokemon Go Craze

#29

Post by dsfyu404ed »

badgers wrote: post #11
jmcdiesel wrote: post #3

Funny how for the longest time now, cities and counties take more and more money from public parks citing their underuse... then when they get used, they cry out legally to stop the use. Part of the costs of a park is cleaning up after people, its already in the budget. So is the landscaping. So is the coverage for wear and tear in general. Its also funny to see the difference. National Park Service embraces Pokemon…

For some background into the phenomenon that was Lake Park last summer, there was a large concentration of Pokestops around Lake Park in a relatively small area. In Pokemon GO there are geographic boundaries that make up biomes in the game which determine which Pokemon to spawn, for instance if you're near a source of water there is a high chance you will encounter water Pokemon. Lake Park appeared to not have any bi…

x2

Local government in places with a waterfront is almost completely made up of people who have a special interest to champion and spends 90% of it's time bickering about said interests.

That article reminds me of my hometown.

Re: Judge Rules Milwaukee Flouted U.S. Constitution in Response to Pokemon Go Craze

#30

Post by [deleted] »

dragonwriter wrote: post #19
Sleeep wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They were complaining the enforcement was what was expensive... "It cost the city tens of thousands of dollars in additional law enforcement."

Government doesn't have a right to cheap enforcement that trumps rights held by the people, like those protected by the First Amendment.

[deleted]
Post reply on HN