[Barefoot]

Originally Posted by PennBF

This has become a "Political Football" and that is never the way to solve a problem. There are only 2 or 3 options, (e.g. paint center lines, curb painting or install your own lights on your cart.) Unfortunately there are those who have lost objective positions and are tied to their own wishes. This never leads to the best solution or answer. It only leads to each digging in their heals and thus the loss of the best answer. One of the basic rules of compromise is that each will changed their mind if convinced by the other. This logic has obviously been lost. It is now who can yell loud and over the other? There are the walkers who think they are at risk if the center lines are painted, the bikers who feel about the same, the cart drivers who think both of these arguments don't make sense. and the ones who don't want to spend money and say to just be careful. Talk about a dysfunctional group of arguments.

Do you have a convincing argument for your point of view?
Or are you just scolding us for expressing our "dysfunctional" opinions?

[PennBF]

The note regarding whether I have a "convincing argument" is a fine example of my point. The answer is no. That would imply that under the current positions all would agree with my argument. Given the heals and opinions that have been dug in it would be naive of me to believe I have found the answer that would cause all to agree. When I mentioned "dysfunctional group of arguments" it was based on the definition of "dysfunctional" which includes unhealthy interpersonal behavior within a group. I believe that not to work together to solve this problem but rather lock into a position is an example of unhealthy interpersonal behavior. I hope this clarifies my note.

[Polar Bear]

Originally Posted by PennBF

The note regarding whether I have a "convincing argument" is a fine example of my point. The answer is no. That would imply that under the current positions all would agree with my argument. Given the heals and opinions that have been dug in it would be naive of me to believe I have found the answer that would cause all to agree. When I mentioned "dysfunctional group of arguments" it was based on the definition of "dysfunctional" which includes unhealthy interpersonal behavior within a group. I believe that not to work together to solve this problem but rather lock into a position is an example of unhealthy interpersonal behavior. I hope this clarifies my note.

Not for me.

I agree with Barefoot. Sounds like your just scolding everybody, disguising it with some high-falootin' language.

[PennBF]

Wow this is the first time I have been accused of using "high falootin" language. That is really funny. I never realized "dysfunctional" is high falootin. You can't make this stuff up. There is really no where to go from here since I don't want to lose the readers because I am being too "high falootin". Is there any wonder as to why the MMP issues continue to drag on?

[Polar Bear]

Originally Posted by PennBF;1090***

Wow this is the first time I have been accused of using "high falootin" language. That is really funny. I never realized "dysfunctional" is high falootin. You can't make this stuff up. There is really no where to go from here since I don't want to lose the readers because I am being too "high falootin"...

Oh, don't sell yourself short. You picked just one word out of your post. You do yourself a disservice.

[TheVillageChicken]

I guess the pro-stripping stance is that if one can clearly see the side of the road marked by something highly visible, they won't run off the road. Well, somebody didn't get the memo. These are two different posts on Mulberry Trail.

[Arctic Fox]

All of the striping suggestions and costings appear to be based on 100% of the length of the paths being painted.

In reality, driving along a straight section of path is relatively easy, even in low visibility situations.

Side-striping just the bends and their approaches would make the danger areas safer, whilst reducing the overall cost significantly.

[Polar Bear]

Originally Posted by TheVillageChicken

These are two different posts on Mulberry Trail.

Wait...MMP posts were hit? That does it...stop the striping movement immediately.

[Shimpy]

Originally Posted by outlaw

Lighting the MMPs with downward projecting lights would enhance safety at night and during rain storms, and provide nice aesthetics. I think this would be a wonderful enhancement to TV. This could be in lieu of striping, which many think is ugly.

I'm thinking this post has to be a joke. Can you imagine what 1 mile of running street lights would cost compared to painting stripes?

[NavyNJ]

Originally Posted by Polar Bear

Wait...MMP posts were hit? That does it...stop the striping movement immediately.

Lighted posts maybe?? Could use a small solar collector and low voltage LED lights to minimize costs and ongoing maintenance. And for better daytime visibility, maybe stripe the posts, barber pole style!

[OCsun]

NavyNJ, Great suggestion!

[Justus]

Originally Posted by TheVillageChicken

I guess the pro-stripping stance is that if one can clearly see the side of the road marked by something highly visible, they won't run off the road. Well, somebody didn't get the memo. These are two different posts on Mulberry Trail.

Love it!

[Justus]

Originally Posted by Polar Bear

Oh, don't sell yourself short. You picked just one word out of your post. You do yourself a disservice.

[Polar Bear]

Originally Posted by Arctic Fox

...Side-striping just the bends and their approaches would make the danger areas safer, whilst reducing the overall cost significantly.

Agree. I'm not in favor of striping the entire MMP. I've just noticed some localized areas that could benefit from some edge-striping or reflectors.

[The Buckeyes]

How about those embedded reflective light you sometimes see on the highways. Maybe have them solar powered. It may be expensive, or not because they are spaced apart. Did engineers cost it out compared to the cost of continuous re-painting. Just a thought