They should prevent this kind of advertising

http://edition.cnn.com/2005/TECH/spa...eut/index.html

On Sat, 21 May 2005 15:01:05 -0400, RichA wrote:

http://edition.cnn.com/2005/TECH/spa...eut/index.html

I like the last line:

"Large advertisements could destroy the darkness of the night sky,"
regulators said.

Now, if they'd just catch on to the fact that 100% of all large
advertisements are currently on the ground. Still, can't complain
anytime someone in an official capacity treats the night sky as
something to be preserved.

_________________________________________________

Chris L Peterson
Cloudbait Observatory
http://www.cloudbait.com

On Sat, 21 May 2005 19:48:09 GMT, Chris L Peterson
wrote:

On Sat, 21 May 2005 15:01:05 -0400, RichA wrote:

http://edition.cnn.com/2005/TECH/spa...eut/index.html

I like the last line:

"Large advertisements could destroy the darkness of the night sky,"
regulators said.

Now, if they'd just catch on to the fact that 100% of all large
advertisements are currently on the ground. Still, can't complain
anytime someone in an official capacity treats the night sky as
something to be preserved.

That tactic would probably be a waste of time with most people.
The concept of preserving it is alien. However, shaming the owners
of property into turning off useless, wasteful lighting and cities
into adopting more directed, conservative street lighting is probably
the best route. Hammer away at the themes of saving money, saving
electricity, saving the environment is what the average suburban
wannabee environmentalist understands, even while they drive vehicles
that get 10mpg.
-Rich

What I find stupid about this suggestion and others is that these people have
obviously not contacted any lawyers who know anything, otherwise the specter of
people suing them for flooding the nighttime with bright lights and ruining
people's sleep, not to mention the useless energy expense and the resultant bill
and who's going to pay for that, never enters their head.

--- Dave
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Pinprick holes in a colorless sky
Let inspired figures of light pass by
The Mighty Light of ten thousand suns
Challenges infinity, and is soon gone




"Chris L Peterson" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 21 May 2005 15:01:05 -0400, RichA wrote:

http://edition.cnn.com/2005/TECH/spa...eut/index.html

I like the last line:

"Large advertisements could destroy the darkness of the night sky,"
regulators said.

Now, if they'd just catch on to the fact that 100% of all large
advertisements are currently on the ground. Still, can't complain
anytime someone in an official capacity treats the night sky as
something to be preserved.

_________________________________________________

Chris L Peterson
Cloudbait Observatory
http://www.cloudbait.com

There is something you anti lighting folks have never been able to get your
minds around. Lighting is power.
Olga



RichA wrote:

http://edition.cnn.com/2005/TECH/spa...eut/index.html

On Thu, 26 May 2005 00:41:05 -0500, Olga Kulodnai
wrote:

There is something you anti lighting folks have never been able to get your
minds around. Lighting is power.
Olga

So is consumer irritation.
-Rich

And what, pray tell, is consumer irritation - is that thirty second cousin to
consumer fraud which if it is actual "fraud:" you are concenred about, why
dont you simply say so rather than beating around the George Bush in yet another

ambivalence free dance of nothingism? Given your personality, I'm willing to
be you've comitted a little "consumer irritation: of your own during your life,
and got away with it? So, what goes around comes around - whose oxe is getting
gored is the point of all of this? Seems pretty shallow to me unless you are
willing
to call the animal by its real name and stop wallowing in meaningless
irritationisms.

Olga





RichA wrote:

On Thu, 26 May 2005 00:41:05 -0500, Olga Kulodnai
wrote:

There is something you anti lighting folks have never been able to get your
minds around. Lighting is power.
Olga

So is consumer irritation.
-Rich

Actually, lighting is frequently an unneeded and unwanted expense. Pay for
it yourself and see what I mean.

"Olga" wrote in message
...
And what, pray tell, is consumer irritation - is that thirty second cousin
to
consumer fraud which if it is actual "fraud:" you are concenred about, why
dont you simply say so rather than beating around the George Bush in yet
another

ambivalence free dance of nothingism? Given your personality, I'm willing
to
be you've comitted a little "consumer irritation: of your own during your
life,
and got away with it? So, what goes around comes around - whose oxe is
getting
gored is the point of all of this? Seems pretty shallow to me unless you
are
willing
to call the animal by its real name and stop wallowing in meaningless
irritationisms.

Olga





RichA wrote:

On Thu, 26 May 2005 00:41:05 -0500, Olga Kulodnai
wrote:

There is something you anti lighting folks have never been able to get
your
minds around. Lighting is power.
Olga

So is consumer irritation.
-Rich