3 ms·

> On the one hand, you complain that you deserve the same right to quiet so your sleep isn't disturbed. On the other, you tell people "If you are a light sleepe

by louthy 8y ago

> On the one hand, you complain that you deserve the same right to quiet so your sleep isn't disturbed. On the other, you tell people "If you are a light sleeper, get ear plugs." I never said I deserve quiet, I pointed out the discrepancy. It's the sleeper that desires the quiet, but different people sleep different hours of the day, especially in a city. I don't write off to my local council every time I'm awoken at 8am by a rubbish truck, even if I'd only gone to bed a few hours before. Why should people who are awake at so-called 'normal hours' be afforded any additional sympathy? And why should their desires override others? What makes them special? Are people who are awake through the night 'lesser people'? Or not as important in your world view? If I can sleep through the daywalker's noise, then daywalkers can sleep thru the nightwalker's noise. And if not, then they're probably living in the wrong part of the city. I find it endlessly perplexing that people will move to places known for the nightlife and then start complaining about it once there.

DoreenMichele 8y ago
They aren't "special." They are the majority. I'm not arguing that night owls are lesser people. I'm just saying these sorts of conflicts are basically inescapable. They have existed as long as humans have and there is no magic wand solution. Everyone would like the entire world to work well for them as an individual. Therein lies the rub. We would all like to be able to make noise when we feel like it and to have undisturbed sleep at will where other people are expected to be quiet during that time. The reality is we have two possible choices here: 1. A small number of very powerful people can impose their will on everyone else like that while the majority live in misery. 2. We struggle to find best practices that work reasonably well for as many people as possible. The second scenario is what most modern cultures typically shoot for. Since night owls are in the minority, policies tend to favor day people. In theory, we could insist everyone be quiet all the time. In practice, this interferes with industry, commercial, recreation and generally having a life. So in reality we need to demarcate times when an acceptable amount of noise can happen so life can happen. There are no simple answers. It's a complicated problem.
- louthy 8y ago
  I notice on your second point you didn't use the phrase "whilst the minority live in misery" like you did for your first point. Good attempt at making readers more sympathetic to your one sided argument. You say the minority here are not lesser people, but you write them off as irrelevant and we shouldn't even bother to look for a solution because the majority have decreed it, and therefore their problems or opinions are irrelevant. If the majority decided to torture the minority, or enslave them, or segregate them, I assume you would consider that immoral, right? And that the majority shouldn't just have carte blanche to do whatever they like to the minority - democracy isn't about 'screwing the minority'. So, if the sound does really make life "a misery" then isn't that accepting of the torturing of people who have to sleep during the day? Isn't that immoral? The majority inflicting torturous sound on the minority during their sleeping hours? Or, is it actually the case that the sound isn't really that bad, and that we should all learn to be a bit more accommodating to the fact that in a city people live and work on different schedules, and that your nighttime hours are not sacred. And using your majority position to inflict your will on other people's waking hours just so you can enjoy your sleeping hours is unjustified. If you live in a city, in an area that's known for it's nighttime scene, I don't see why you should have any special privileges. Just like I don't expect any special privileges because I often sleep the hours that many are awake.
  - DoreenMichele 8y ago
    but you write them off as irrelevant and we shouldn't even bother to look for a solution because the majority have decreed it I said and did no such thing. I'm sorry you seem to be so angry about this, but I don't see any reason why I should be a target of that anger. I don't intend to reply further to your comments here.
    - louthy 8y ago
      I am not angry at you or anybody else on here, sorry if you felt that way. I am arguing my point quite strongly because I have seen aspects of nighttime culture that I feel quite passionately about be destroyed/decimated by the gentrification wave in London. For example, take a look at this google streetview link [1]. That is The Egg nightclub, it's on York Way in Central London. It was a very industrial area when the club was built. If you pan the camera around, you'll see the residential flats that have been built in the past few years. They are now trying to get the club shut down. There are two other ex-clubs in a 100 metre walk of that point that suffered a similar fate. This is unacceptable in my opinion, and this is what bugs me about this nonacceptance of nighttime culture - especially in areas where it's often the cause for the regeneration of an area in the first place. Those things made the area cool, the gentrified move in, they kill it. When I said you implied that we should "write them off as irrelevant and we shouldn't even bother to look for a solution because the majority have decreed it" I was referring to this: > In theory, we could insist everyone be quiet all the time. In practice, this interferes with industry, commercial, recreation and generally having a life. Where you appear to state that industry, commercial, recreation and [day time people] having a life is more important than a sizeable minority of human being's quality-of-life. Now, maybe that was a leap too far, but the implication I got was that the majority are more important and that a subset of humanity is irrelevant and should basically be ignored, because finding a solution is too hard; or even just having a bit of understanding that people have different cycles rather than forcing their world to be shut down whilst they're awake, is too hard. [1] https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.5417762,-0.125419,3a,75y,75.4h,91.29t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sSAh0GVA8hHSugxC8gr6dgg!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo1.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DSAh0GVA8hHSugxC8gr6dgg%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D53.78743%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i13312!8i6656 https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.5417762,-0.125419,3a,75y,7...

by louthy 8y ago

DoreenMichele 8y ago

They aren't "special." They are the majority. I'm not arguing that night owls are lesser people. I'm just saying these sorts of conflicts are basically inescapable. They have existed as long as humans have and there is no magic wand solution. Everyone would like the entire world to work well for them as an individual. Therein lies the rub. We would all like to be able to make noise when we feel like it and to have undisturbed sleep at will where other people are expected to be quiet during that time. The reality is we have two possible choices here: 1. A small number of very powerful people can impose their will on everyone else like that while the majority live in misery. 2. We struggle to find best practices that work reasonably well for as many people as possible. The second scenario is what most modern cultures typically shoot for. Since night owls are in the minority, policies tend to favor day people. In theory, we could insist everyone be quiet all the time. In practice, this interferes with industry, commercial, recreation and generally having a life. So in reality we need to demarcate times when an acceptable amount of noise can happen so life can happen. There are no simple answers. It's a complicated problem.

louthy 8y ago
I notice on your second point you didn't use the phrase "whilst the minority live in misery" like you did for your first point. Good attempt at making readers more sympathetic to your one sided argument. You say the minority here are not lesser people, but you write them off as irrelevant and we shouldn't even bother to look for a solution because the majority have decreed it, and therefore their problems or opinions are irrelevant. If the majority decided to torture the minority, or enslave them, or segregate them, I assume you would consider that immoral, right? And that the majority shouldn't just have carte blanche to do whatever they like to the minority - democracy isn't about 'screwing the minority'. So, if the sound does really make life "a misery" then isn't that accepting of the torturing of people who have to sleep during the day? Isn't that immoral? The majority inflicting torturous sound on the minority during their sleeping hours? Or, is it actually the case that the sound isn't really that bad, and that we should all learn to be a bit more accommodating to the fact that in a city people live and work on different schedules, and that your nighttime hours are not sacred. And using your majority position to inflict your will on other people's waking hours just so you can enjoy your sleeping hours is unjustified. If you live in a city, in an area that's known for it's nighttime scene, I don't see why you should have any special privileges. Just like I don't expect any special privileges because I often sleep the hours that many are awake.
- DoreenMichele 8y ago
  but you write them off as irrelevant and we shouldn't even bother to look for a solution because the majority have decreed it I said and did no such thing. I'm sorry you seem to be so angry about this, but I don't see any reason why I should be a target of that anger. I don't intend to reply further to your comments here.
  - louthy 8y ago
    I am not angry at you or anybody else on here, sorry if you felt that way. I am arguing my point quite strongly because I have seen aspects of nighttime culture that I feel quite passionately about be destroyed/decimated by the gentrification wave in London. For example, take a look at this google streetview link [1]. That is The Egg nightclub, it's on York Way in Central London. It was a very industrial area when the club was built. If you pan the camera around, you'll see the residential flats that have been built in the past few years. They are now trying to get the club shut down. There are two other ex-clubs in a 100 metre walk of that point that suffered a similar fate. This is unacceptable in my opinion, and this is what bugs me about this nonacceptance of nighttime culture - especially in areas where it's often the cause for the regeneration of an area in the first place. Those things made the area cool, the gentrified move in, they kill it. When I said you implied that we should "write them off as irrelevant and we shouldn't even bother to look for a solution because the majority have decreed it" I was referring to this: > In theory, we could insist everyone be quiet all the time. In practice, this interferes with industry, commercial, recreation and generally having a life. Where you appear to state that industry, commercial, recreation and [day time people] having a life is more important than a sizeable minority of human being's quality-of-life. Now, maybe that was a leap too far, but the implication I got was that the majority are more important and that a subset of humanity is irrelevant and should basically be ignored, because finding a solution is too hard; or even just having a bit of understanding that people have different cycles rather than forcing their world to be shut down whilst they're awake, is too hard. [1] https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.5417762,-0.125419,3a,75y,75.4h,91.29t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sSAh0GVA8hHSugxC8gr6dgg!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo1.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DSAh0GVA8hHSugxC8gr6dgg%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D53.78743%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i13312!8i6656 https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.5417762,-0.125419,3a,75y,7...