4 ms·

I'm curious if you want to make a substantive point, please go ahead and do so without waiting for my complete biographical details.

• paulcole 8y ago
  The timeline you've laid out: Pre 2005 - "general impression it was very Bohemian with a strong underground scene" 2005-2010 - "the city had a very positive vibe" Post 2010 - "overcrowded, overvalued and overcapitalized" "a capitalist parody of this former self" My guess is that you likely moved to SF around 2005 and the city fortunately managed to maintain its "very positive vibe." Yet someone who moved there in the mid 80s would likely have a very different opinion of the same era. Similarly some tech bro who moved there in 2010 would likely have a more rose-colored take on the 2010-2018 era. I guess my substantive point is that people like to think they were there when it was good no matter when they were there.
  • loggedinmyphone 8y ago
    I got that from your previous comment. I don't think it means the city is the same in 2018 as it was in 2005 or 1985. I'm talking about specific structural differences that don't have anything to do with when I got here (e.g rent).
    • paulcole 8y ago
      No but it calls into question your assessment of the city.
      • loggedinmyphone 8y ago
        I'm well aware of potential cognitive biases based on the arc of personal experience and I think I've accounted for that above. Meanwhile you've addressed zero of my objective points. You're a troll.
        • paulcole 8y ago
          I have no idea what your objective points are. All you’ve said is, “the city used to be good now it isn’t.”