7 ms·

Funny how for the longest time now, cities and counties take more and more money from public parks citing their underuse... then when they get used, they cry ou

Funny how for the longest time now, cities and counties take more and more money from public parks citing their underuse... then when they get used, they cry out legally to stop the use. Part of the costs of a park is cleaning up after people, its already in the budget. So is the landscaping. So is the coverage for wear and tear in general. Its also funny to see the difference. National Park Service embraces Pokemon Go and enjoyed the increased park traffic. Austin embraced it and stores all over downtown and even government buildings had specials for Pokemon GO'ers (some public art museums here gave like 50% off admission if you were Pokemon hunting) And the fact that so many normally sedentary people were getting up and going out and doing shit and getting exercise .. and people still went out of their way to be dicks about it... I don't get it. Aside from Niantic's handling of the game, its PR and its issues, the pokemon GO craze was probably one of the most positive, healthy things to go viral in a very long time in the US...

QAPereo 9y ago
I suspect that down the line, some group of clever people will design something like Pokemon GO, but with some real meat on its bones and a long, monetized lifetime. At that point, you have to wonder if there will be a measurable hit on childhood obesity. I suspect there might be, albeit relatively small, still a measurable reduction.
- patrickmay 9y ago
  From your lips to Blizzard's ears....
- crooked-v 9y ago
  If VR gets broadly popular it might also have some effect in this direction, since the most popular games so far (Echo Arena, Job Simulator, Climbey, etc) all require a fair bit of arm and body movement. It's not the most intense exercise, but it's way better than nothing, especially since the engagement of it means looking forward to it rather than dreading it as unpleasant exercise.
MichaelGG 9y ago
Wear and tear and cleaning up isn't some binary budgeted-or-not thing. You can expect a certain flow and behaviour, and something can radically change that. If some popular band said they were doing a goodbye concert and it was only available in AR at a park, you can bet it'd cause far more wear and tear in one day than they budgeted for a long time. But trying to block the AR game is the wrong approach. They should instead implement a generic way to handle such things. Either fine people, or have some maximum occupancy rules.
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
DanBC 9y ago
> And the fact that so many normally sedentary people were getting up and going out and doing shit and getting exercise A minor nit, but Pokemon go did not increase activity levels for most players. http://www.nhs.uk/news/2016/12December/Pages/Pok%C3%A9mon-no-go-games-exercise-effects-short-lived-in-most-players.aspx http://www.nhs.uk/news/2016/12December/Pages/Pok%C3%A9mon-no... http://www.bmj.com/content/355/bmj.i6270 http://www.bmj.com/content/355/bmj.i6270
- uremog 9y ago
  Well, it did, but only for a short while. And that may just be because of how bad it was.
- johnny_and1 9y ago
  It just increased general phone usage by ~16% per day. Daily path length stayed the same. (Source: study on 2800 phone users that played Pokemon GO. Data collected for at least 4 weeks having the first gaming session in the middle. Data was collected through an app that monitors your phone usage, no self-reported data. Will be presented at MobileHCI '17)
  - cududa 9y ago
    Too small a sample size for physical activity (fine for HCI, though) and was probably orchestrated after the hype of it. Does this paper live in those parameters?
    - johnny_and1 9y ago
      Initial sample size was 21k users but we've reduced it to the people that filled some questionnaire regarding demographics and personality traits. To which parameters are you referring?
- brewdad 9y ago
  In my town it increased traffic (and road accidents). Players would drive up to the nearest Pokestop, collect their loot, and drive to the next one. I saw more than a few drivers make sudden turns or stops when an interesting spawn would occur. I don't really miss the craze.
wfunction 9y ago
>> City officials were aghast at large numbers of individuals playing Pokemon Go who visited parks, littered, trampled grass and flowers, and stayed past park hours. This seems like a legitimate issue though. How do you propose it be solved?
- jmcdiesel 9y ago
  Staying past park hours for the most part is dumb... as far as being a big deal, its not. People walking around trying to play a game after hours is no something that needs policing in the first place... Is the game responsible for people littering? Or tramping grass (seriously, its grass... lets get over ourselves) or flowers... Is the game responsible for that, or are the people who do the wrong thing responsible? This points at the overall shifting of blame for everything that is becoming so common in our culture... put the blame on the person who does the wrong thing.
  - wfunction 9y ago
    >> This seems like a legitimate issue though. How do you propose it be solved? > Is the game responsible for people littering? I feel like you didn't answer my question? Edit, to clarify: I'm asking what the actual solution is: expecting the city to pay for skyrocketing enforcement? Or letting the park get trashed and then blaming the citizens? Or just closing the park and blaming people for it happening? etc.
    - nemo44x 9y ago
      I think they did: > put the blame on the person who does the wrong thing.
      - LoonyBalloony 9y ago
        While I agree, I think the problem is affording blaming the person who does the wrong thing. Perhaps more permanent solution to the problem is in order such as fencing around the flowers getting trampled. End the drug war if you want to save money elsewhere for this.
badgers 9y ago
For some background into the phenomenon that was Lake Park last summer, there was a large concentration of Pokestops around Lake Park in a relatively small area. In Pokemon GO there are geographic boundaries that make up biomes in the game which determine which Pokemon to spawn, for instance if you're near a source of water there is a high chance you will encounter water Pokemon. Lake Park appeared to not have any biome, which led to anything from the game being able to appear, including more rare types of Pokemon. Pokemon GO also has something called a lure module that players can place down which will attract more Pokemon to a Pokestop for 15 minutes. All these factors working together caused a massive influx of players to Lake Park from players from the greater Milwaukee and nearby Waukesha counties. The area surrounding Lake park has affluent people living around there (homes valued in the range of $500k - $950k), and the Lake Park Bistro upscale restaurant was just north of the park with the largest parking lot closest to the concentration of Pokestops. Prior to Pokemon GO it was a quiet area with a great view of Lake Michigan from many of the homes along Lake Drive. I'm inclined to believe that it was not only a combination of the holy grail Pokemon GO location for the greater Milwaukee area, but also a bit of "Not In My Backyard" [1] that led to the augmented reality game ordinance. [1] - http://milwaukeerecord.com/city-life/lake-parks-pokemon-go-meeting-was-boring-occasionally-livid-gloriously-absurd/ http://milwaukeerecord.com/city-life/lake-parks-pokemon-go-m...
- dsfyu404ed 9y ago
  x2 Local government in places with a waterfront is almost completely made up of people who have a special interest to champion and spends 90% of it's time bickering about said interests. That article reminds me of my hometown.
- salesguy222 9y ago
  This is a good explanation of "how" the people in charge of these ordinances came to their judgment... but not a good explanation of "why we must" have these ordinances. Boston Common and the Public Gardens had a massive number of Pokestops. Last summer, the benches were overflowing, easily many hundreds more people in a small area than there ever would be. And to my knowledge nobody cared or complained. And this is arguably the most expensive part of the city, with home values of 10M and etc. Good on the judge for this ruling.
kafkaesq 9y ago
then when they get used, they cry out legally to stop the use. The parks weren't just being "used", people were littering, staying after hours, trampling on flowerbeds and stuff. Or did you miss that part of the article? So many normally sedentary people were getting up and going out and doing shit and getting exercise .. and people still went out of their way to be dicks about it... I don't get it. Say what you want about the city's misguided attempts at enforcement. But by no means was it in response to "normally sedentary people getting exercise."
- zamalek 9y ago
  > The parks weren't just being "used", people were littering, staying after hours, trampling on flowerbeds and stuff. Or did you miss that part of the article? These are problems that any park that has high traffic has to deal with. The judge offered reasonable solutions that didn't involve dissuading people from using the park. > But my no means was it in response to "normally sedentary people getting exercise." From the article: "Requiring Candy Lab to secure insurance, portable restrooms, security, clean-up, and provide a timeline for an 'event'" That is very directly a response to normally sedentary people getting exercise - the city wants them out of the park.
  - deleted 9y ago
    [deleted]
  - kafkaesq 9y ago
    These are problems that any park that has high traffic has to deal with. No, they're not problems of "high traffic". That would be things like too many people on the lawn above intended capacity, and what not. The point is that by any common sense definition, the kinds of activities noted by the authorities constitute "abuse", not "use" (as there is no intended allowance of things like trampling flower beds, etc, at any level of capacity). And hence, in any place where you have actual working municipal governance, you'll find that they're dealt with appropriately. If you don't see the importance of this distinction -- sorry, but you're very confused.

QAPereo 9y ago

I suspect that down the line, some group of clever people will design something like Pokemon GO, but with some real meat on its bones and a long, monetized lifetime. At that point, you have to wonder if there will be a measurable hit on childhood obesity. I suspect there might be, albeit relatively small, still a measurable reduction.

patrickmay 9y ago
From your lips to Blizzard's ears....
crooked-v 9y ago
If VR gets broadly popular it might also have some effect in this direction, since the most popular games so far (Echo Arena, Job Simulator, Climbey, etc) all require a fair bit of arm and body movement. It's not the most intense exercise, but it's way better than nothing, especially since the engagement of it means looking forward to it rather than dreading it as unpleasant exercise.

MichaelGG 9y ago

Wear and tear and cleaning up isn't some binary budgeted-or-not thing. You can expect a certain flow and behaviour, and something can radically change that. If some popular band said they were doing a goodbye concert and it was only available in AR at a park, you can bet it'd cause far more wear and tear in one day than they budgeted for a long time. But trying to block the AR game is the wrong approach. They should instead implement a generic way to handle such things. Either fine people, or have some maximum occupancy rules.

deleted 9y ago
[deleted]

DanBC 9y ago

> And the fact that so many normally sedentary people were getting up and going out and doing shit and getting exercise A minor nit, but Pokemon go did not increase activity levels for most players. http://www.nhs.uk/news/2016/12December/Pages/Pok%C3%A9mon-no-go-games-exercise-effects-short-lived-in-most-players.aspx http://www.nhs.uk/news/2016/12December/Pages/Pok%C3%A9mon-no... http://www.bmj.com/content/355/bmj.i6270 http://www.bmj.com/content/355/bmj.i6270

uremog 9y ago
Well, it did, but only for a short while. And that may just be because of how bad it was.
johnny_and1 9y ago
It just increased general phone usage by ~16% per day. Daily path length stayed the same. (Source: study on 2800 phone users that played Pokemon GO. Data collected for at least 4 weeks having the first gaming session in the middle. Data was collected through an app that monitors your phone usage, no self-reported data. Will be presented at MobileHCI '17)
- cududa 9y ago
  Too small a sample size for physical activity (fine for HCI, though) and was probably orchestrated after the hype of it. Does this paper live in those parameters?
  - johnny_and1 9y ago
    Initial sample size was 21k users but we've reduced it to the people that filled some questionnaire regarding demographics and personality traits. To which parameters are you referring?
brewdad 9y ago
In my town it increased traffic (and road accidents). Players would drive up to the nearest Pokestop, collect their loot, and drive to the next one. I saw more than a few drivers make sudden turns or stops when an interesting spawn would occur. I don't really miss the craze.

wfunction 9y ago

>> City officials were aghast at large numbers of individuals playing Pokemon Go who visited parks, littered, trampled grass and flowers, and stayed past park hours. This seems like a legitimate issue though. How do you propose it be solved?

jmcdiesel 9y ago
Staying past park hours for the most part is dumb... as far as being a big deal, its not. People walking around trying to play a game after hours is no something that needs policing in the first place... Is the game responsible for people littering? Or tramping grass (seriously, its grass... lets get over ourselves) or flowers... Is the game responsible for that, or are the people who do the wrong thing responsible? This points at the overall shifting of blame for everything that is becoming so common in our culture... put the blame on the person who does the wrong thing.
- wfunction 9y ago
  >> This seems like a legitimate issue though. How do you propose it be solved? > Is the game responsible for people littering? I feel like you didn't answer my question? Edit, to clarify: I'm asking what the actual solution is: expecting the city to pay for skyrocketing enforcement? Or letting the park get trashed and then blaming the citizens? Or just closing the park and blaming people for it happening? etc.
  - nemo44x 9y ago
    I think they did: > put the blame on the person who does the wrong thing.
    - LoonyBalloony 9y ago
      While I agree, I think the problem is affording blaming the person who does the wrong thing. Perhaps more permanent solution to the problem is in order such as fencing around the flowers getting trampled. End the drug war if you want to save money elsewhere for this.

badgers 9y ago

For some background into the phenomenon that was Lake Park last summer, there was a large concentration of Pokestops around Lake Park in a relatively small area. In Pokemon GO there are geographic boundaries that make up biomes in the game which determine which Pokemon to spawn, for instance if you're near a source of water there is a high chance you will encounter water Pokemon. Lake Park appeared to not have any biome, which led to anything from the game being able to appear, including more rare types of Pokemon. Pokemon GO also has something called a lure module that players can place down which will attract more Pokemon to a Pokestop for 15 minutes. All these factors working together caused a massive influx of players to Lake Park from players from the greater Milwaukee and nearby Waukesha counties. The area surrounding Lake park has affluent people living around there (homes valued in the range of $500k - $950k), and the Lake Park Bistro upscale restaurant was just north of the park with the largest parking lot closest to the concentration of Pokestops. Prior to Pokemon GO it was a quiet area with a great view of Lake Michigan from many of the homes along Lake Drive. I'm inclined to believe that it was not only a combination of the holy grail Pokemon GO location for the greater Milwaukee area, but also a bit of "Not In My Backyard" [1] that led to the augmented reality game ordinance. [1] - http://milwaukeerecord.com/city-life/lake-parks-pokemon-go-meeting-was-boring-occasionally-livid-gloriously-absurd/ http://milwaukeerecord.com/city-life/lake-parks-pokemon-go-m...

dsfyu404ed 9y ago
x2 Local government in places with a waterfront is almost completely made up of people who have a special interest to champion and spends 90% of it's time bickering about said interests. That article reminds me of my hometown.
salesguy222 9y ago
This is a good explanation of "how" the people in charge of these ordinances came to their judgment... but not a good explanation of "why we must" have these ordinances. Boston Common and the Public Gardens had a massive number of Pokestops. Last summer, the benches were overflowing, easily many hundreds more people in a small area than there ever would be. And to my knowledge nobody cared or complained. And this is arguably the most expensive part of the city, with home values of 10M and etc. Good on the judge for this ruling.

kafkaesq 9y ago

then when they get used, they cry out legally to stop the use. The parks weren't just being "used", people were littering, staying after hours, trampling on flowerbeds and stuff. Or did you miss that part of the article? So many normally sedentary people were getting up and going out and doing shit and getting exercise .. and people still went out of their way to be dicks about it... I don't get it. Say what you want about the city's misguided attempts at enforcement. But by no means was it in response to "normally sedentary people getting exercise."

zamalek 9y ago
> The parks weren't just being "used", people were littering, staying after hours, trampling on flowerbeds and stuff. Or did you miss that part of the article? These are problems that any park that has high traffic has to deal with. The judge offered reasonable solutions that didn't involve dissuading people from using the park. > But my no means was it in response to "normally sedentary people getting exercise." From the article: "Requiring Candy Lab to secure insurance, portable restrooms, security, clean-up, and provide a timeline for an 'event'" That is very directly a response to normally sedentary people getting exercise - the city wants them out of the park.
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
- kafkaesq 9y ago
  These are problems that any park that has high traffic has to deal with. No, they're not problems of "high traffic". That would be things like too many people on the lawn above intended capacity, and what not. The point is that by any common sense definition, the kinds of activities noted by the authorities constitute "abuse", not "use" (as there is no intended allowance of things like trampling flower beds, etc, at any level of capacity). And hence, in any place where you have actual working municipal governance, you'll find that they're dealt with appropriately. If you don't see the importance of this distinction -- sorry, but you're very confused.