Originally Posted by Miboater (Post 2419125)

I hope this will put to rest the talk that Don Wiley is a puppet of the developer.

Originally Posted by Goldwingnut (Post 2419292)

I don't have the time to spend composing responses that are easier said than written. I'm holding my tongue as I continue to work through these issues. I'll have something to say on my 3 o'clock Sunday broadcast. Until thing I need to spend my time getting #154 ready for release.

Originally Posted by BrianL99 (Post 2419430)

& you are exactly right. The Developer doesn't have to "win", he only has to "not lose" or win by default, when the opposition gives up or goes broke.

I'm shocked by the general tone of this discussion. In a community that consists primarily of an older, conservative population, I would think that constituency would be more concerned with protecting privacy rights.

I suspect the tone would be entirely different, if the discussion involved their personal space and/or real estate and not the private space/property of the "big bad Developer".

Ethics are often situational.

Originally Posted by Bill14564 (Post 2419444)

SSDD

I expect privacy *within* my home, not out in my yard. Hiding behind a tree to pee is still out in the yard with no expectation of privacy.

In an area that prohibits fences (for the most part) and hedges, has "kissing lanais," and can find a recent aerial view of their home on the property appraiser's page, few have any misconceptions about their yards being private.

Originally Posted by Johnsocat (Post 2419193)

Oh goody!!! More government regulation and fees for us taxpayers...

Originally Posted by Rocksnap (Post 2419337)

Address please? So drone operators can ‘avoid’ capturing you on video.

Originally Posted by fdpaq0580 (Post 2419457)

Yes, it was a joke. But the point is that while most drone fliers have respect for the public, not all of them do. Picture my house from the street is one thing. Drones filming my backyard from overhead is another. It is a matter of privacy for many. It is an invasion of privacy, like someone reading over your shoulder. Intrusive behavior by some means regulation for all.

Originally Posted by elle123 (Post 2418998)

Maybe, the developers don't want the public to see the poor quality of new construction.

Originally Posted by Bill14564 (Post 2419444)

SSDD

I expect privacy *within* my home, not out in my yard. Hiding behind a tree to pee is still out in the yard with no expectation of privacy.

In an area that prohibits fences (for the most part) and hedges, has "kissing lanais," and can find a recent aerial view of their home on the property appraiser's page, few have any misconceptions about their yards being private.

Originally Posted by rockyhyder (Post 2419065)

Bet you would feel differently if you were the one building houses and trying to market your product nationwide and some guys with no skin in the game were taking drone videos of product you don’t have ready for the market yet and posting it on you tube for their own profit.

Originally Posted by Normal (Post 2419459)

There isn’t any regulation coming.

Originally Posted by fdpaq0580 (Post 2419462)

Not everyone in TV has "kissing" lanais". I have a small pool and deck in a "birdcage" surrounded by tall plants that provide privacy from the street and from my neighbors. I, for one, would find a drone circling overhead to be rude, intrusive, and a possible/probable invasion of privacy for possible nefarious or illegal purpose. Can you say "telephoto lens"?
Go hover over a golfer getting ready to tee-off, or try to make a 15 ft putt for a birdie an a win on a championship course. Then ask how they like drones. I play, and I would not like it one bit.

Originally Posted by fdpaq0580 (Post 2419466)

Once upon a time you could drive a car with out a license

Originally Posted by rsetterlund (Post 2419142)

I wonder what the Villages is trying to hide.