No they're not. They are arguing against a straw man so ridiculous it's more of a small sad-looking pile of straw. And they know it, too; they're a regular car-brained troll in this community, and they've had it pointed out to them why their arguments are nonsense many times before.

[–] Jumuta@sh.itjust.works 7 points 10 months ago (2 children)

carbrains are real but this user isn't one

it's obvious that the real problem is that Melbourne's buses and roads are shit, not that people are driving at normal car speeds.

lowering speed limits are a good thing but really low speeds like 6km/h only belong in carparks and high pedestrian areas.

20km/h should be the norm for areas like shopping streets.

Anyway the real problem is that we have designed our car moving roads to be right in the centre or population centres, and that our buses are really fucking horribly scheduled and operated. Even our 90x "smartbus" high frequency lines have really shit 20m or worse frequency sometimes, and off peak frequency is generally shit on any route, even rail.

It would be nice if 2 people waiting at a crosswalk got priority over 1 person in a car, but that's not going to happen with the primitive "heavy moving box strong" logic in our brains, get real

[–] Zagorath@aussie.zone 1 points 10 months ago

but really low speeds like 6km/h only belong in carparks and high pedestrian areas.

20km/h should be the norm for areas like shopping streets

Absolutely. Which is why that nobody is saying 6 km/h should be the norm. The article said closer to. With current speed limits normally being 60 km/h, and you're extremely lucky if you can get it reduced to 40 km/h, their "closer to" is pretty obviously not saying it should be 6 km/h. They're talking about 30 km/h on local residential streets.

[–] Zagorath@aussie.zone 1 points 10 months ago

fwiw this user definitely is car-brained. It's not just this one comment. They have a long history of opposing improvements to our cities and defending motornormativity.

[–] jimbo@lemmy.world 0 points 10 months ago (1 children)

They are arguing against a straw man so ridiculous it’s more of a small sad-looking pile of straw.

What is the "straw man" in their argument? Be specific.

[–] Zagorath@aussie.zone 0 points 10 months ago (1 children)

No, I won't. Because you're smart enough to figure it out yourself. The only barrier to figuring it out is a deliberate obstinance and opposition to better urban planning.

[–] jimbo@lemmy.world 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

If I knew what the fuck was going on in your brain when you said something, I wouldn't have to ask. I'd also be a lot richer because it would also mean I'm psychic.

[–] Zagorath@aussie.zone 1 points 10 months ago

Alright, here it is so that people with no critical thinking skills can get it:

Nobody, at any point, said we should make the speed limit on all roads 6 km/h.

Nobody even said we should make the speed limit on some roads 6 km/h.

The actual thing actually proposed by road safety advocates and people in favour of better urban planning is reducing the speed limit on local residential streets, and in commercial shopping districts. Usually to 30 km/h.