On 11/16/2015 8:38 AM, India Viola via Bikies wrote:
This has been on my mind recently. Words are just words and you can't
please everyone, but here are my 72 cents:
8 - 80 is now a well-liked progressive planning catch phrase.
Functionally it makes quite a bit of sense. I know it's was coined to be
an inclusionary guideline and this campaign addresses the much needed
issue of perceived safety for *almost* everyone.
But, as long as we're going with perceptions, 80 /feels/ too young to me
to be the upper limit. Although 80 may be a somewhat realistic cut-off
for most, I sure don't want to reach my 70's and have to keep hearing
this rhetoric. So, should it be 8 - 108? youngster - to - senior?
And while I'm on this particular soap box, I'll add: don't we also want
to set the bar so that people with little ones in bike seats, trailers,
box bikes, and even in our bellies (one of my greatest joys while
pregnant was riding a bike!) feel as safe as everyone else?
There, I said it.
Feedback encouraged.
8-80 alliterates nicely, but I prefer AAA (all ages and abilities) for
the reasons you mention. Also, it's positive and inclusionary, while
8-80, as broad as it is, seems exclusive.
--
Steve Arnold, Mayor
2530 Targhee Street, Fitchburg, Wisconsin 53711-5491
Telephone +1 608 278 7700 · Facsimile +1 608 278 7701
steve.arn...@fitchburg.wi.us · http://Arnold.US
Become a supporter: like http://facebook.com/SteveArnoldforMayor.
_______________________________________________
Bikies mailing list
Bikies@lists.danenet.org
http://lists.danenet.org/listinfo.cgi/bikies-danenet.org
