Quote:
Originally Posted by zonerboy
At the risk of inducing an epidemic of terminal boredom, may I say this: the issue here is not poop. The issue is reasonable accommodation of the needs and desires of Villagers who happen to be dog owners. I am well aware that dog parks were not part of the promised amenities when I purchased my home. But perhaps they should be. That's my point. I could be wrong, but perhaps there would be fewer people walking their dogs in the vicinity of postal stations if there were an attractive alternative. Costs associated with providing and maintaining such a facility would be negligible compared to those of other recreational facilities.
I am always quite amazed at the number of posters on this site who seem to be utterly obsessed with "poop". Dr. Freud once postulated that such fascinations had their origin with early difficulties involved in potty training. Hence the derivation of the "anal retentive" and "anal explosive" personality types. I myself decline to make comment on such matters.
|
I am amazed and a little irritated when people say such things as "You knew TV didn't have such-and-such when you moved here." I believe it is okay to move to a place knowing it might not have everything you want, and then work to make it better.
Just because you knew it didn't have 100% of what you wanted doesn't mean you should roll over and play dead. Responsible Dog Owners is starting an effort to get a dog park south of 466A. If enough people work on it, maybe the developer will listen.