--- In AsburyPark@yahoogroups.com, oakdorf [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I think the ad was from 1903.
Brilliantly is relative.
Asbury Park was on the cutting edge of using new technologies. Two
factors played in
Oak is that really an ad for AP from 1903?
The lights were Brilliantly Illuminated until dawn?
That should settle the arguement taking place on this board over
beach front lighting.
I smell complete vindication.
They new back then that visitors wanted a brilliantly lit place at
night so
--- In AsburyPark@yahoogroups.com, justifiedright
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Oak is that really an ad for AP from 1903?
The lights were Brilliantly Illuminated until dawn?
I'll post it tomorrow.
BUT, like werner said, they weren't glaring back then (who really
knows...what people felt
The concept of lighting in our boardwalk area is not a competition about who's
right and
wrong. 1903's Brilliant was much different then 2008, and you can't make a
fair, or
accurate comparison.
And, the discussion about lighting isn't just about how much is appropriate,
it's more
about what
--- In AsburyPark@yahoogroups.com, oakdorf [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
BUT, like werner said, they weren't glaring back then
No I reject that.
Look at the ad - it is trying to convey what to the tourist? That
the lights are BRILLIANT and on til DAWN!
It doesn't say we have comparatively dim
You honestly need to take a chill pill and stop focusing on being right
--- In AsburyPark@yahoogroups.com, justifiedright [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In AsburyPark@yahoogroups.com, oakdorf oakdorf@ wrote:
BUT, like werner said, they weren't glaring back then
No I reject that.
Look
--- In AsburyPark@yahoogroups.com, Jack Pitzer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You honestly need to take a chill pill and stop focusing on
being right
Stop personalizing.
The ad is objective evidence that supports my contention.
It has nothing to do with me - it's the issue.
And STFU.
Everytime
I also think you are missing the point that the lighting was a novelty back
then.
We've been living with outdoor lighting for more then a century now, and it's a
normal part
of life.
The question in AP is simple - Are the fixtures being used appropriate for the
usage?
Are they cost effective?
Tommy - This isn't a court room, it's a message board. Treat it like one.
I do focus on the issue.
You focus on self promotion, and being right, at any cost. That's why your
discussions go
on and on forever. Because you need things to be the Tommy Show
And that's the last thing I'm going to
---
not a drowning accident in its thrity years' existence as a seaside
resort..
Yahoo! Groups Links
* To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/AsburyPark/
* Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional
* To
--- In AsburyPark@yahoogroups.com, Jack Pitzer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I also think you are missing the point that the lighting was a
novelty back then.
Solar.
The figuring out how to produce it cheap as is LED lighting.
Go Green but make it affordable.
LED lighting with solar charging during the day.
I love that idea!
--- In AsburyPark@yahoogroups.com, oakdorf [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In AsburyPark@yahoogroups.com, Jack Pitzer hinge98@ wrote:
I also think you are missing the point that the lighting was a
novelty back then.
Solar.
No you can't adhere to it. Oak posted something that supports my
position. I pointed out that history is symmetrical with that
position.
In response, you said nothing about what Oak posted or the position,
or if one supports the other (you know, the issue).
So no, I don't think you can stop
13 matches
Mail list logo
