They think protecting drivers cars from scratches is more important than protecting pedestrians from getting hit, so they make the sidewalk part of the "clear zone"
Physical design is not neutral.
Physical design is an expression of our values.
this post was submitted on 16 Jul 2025
237 points (80.3% liked)
Fuck Cars
12630 readers
1187 users here now
A place to discuss problems of car centric infrastructure or how it hurts us all. Let's explore the bad world of Cars!
Rules
1. Be Civil
You may not agree on ideas, but please do not be needlessly rude or insulting to other people in this community.
2. No hate speech
Don't discriminate or disparage people on the basis of sex, gender, race, ethnicity, nationality, religion, or sexuality.
3. Don't harass people
Don't follow people you disagree with into multiple threads or into PMs to insult, disparage, or otherwise attack them. And certainly don't doxx any non-public figures.
4. Stay on topic
This community is about cars, their externalities in society, car-dependency, and solutions to these.
5. No reposts
Do not repost content that has already been posted in this community.
Moderator discretion will be used to judge reports with regard to the above rules.
Posting Guidelines
In the absence of a flair system on lemmy yet, letβs try to make it easier to scan through posts by type in here by using tags:
- [meta] for discussions/suggestions about this community itself
- [article] for news articles
- [blog] for any blog-style content
- [video] for video resources
- [academic] for academic studies and sources
- [discussion] for text post questions, rants, and/or discussions
- [meme] for memes
- [image] for any non-meme images
- [misc] for anything that doesnβt fall cleanly into any of the other categories
Recommended communities:
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Your post wasn't Irony, it was sarcasm.
Nope.
https://www.yourdictionary.com/articles/irony-sarcasm-difference
So you've managed to look up the definition and STILL don't understand. That's pretty amazing on your part.
I was not having a go at the OP, and was providing a "wrong" answer, irony, not sarcasm, related, but not the same.
Sarcasm would be me having a go at your attempts at teaching me how to use English, which I won't, since I'm not upset with you, just bemused at your assertions.
See now you're getting it. Your post just now...
Irony.
how do you differentiate the two? (i thought it was neither, but i'm honestly curious about your reasoning
Because sarcasm in this case pointedly gets it wrong. It does so on purpose to convey absurdity (generally as a reply to something which the poster thinks is as equally absurd as their own statement)
The rail is definitely not put there to protect the trees, and then the absurdity of it is expounded upon by adding the zoo statement.