2 ms·
> Safety on the road is more important that the freedom to annoy drivers. That wasn't the point, although you are tacitly advancing the idea that annoying sign
by Supermancho 5y ago
> Safety on the road is more important that the freedom to annoy drivers.
That wasn't the point, although you are tacitly advancing the idea that annoying signage is acceptable whenever you think it's fine AND what you "watch" is voluntary. You're halfway there. There's not much to be gained from logically stepping you through it.
> Also, you can express yourself elsewhere instead of on the road.
Given the kind of answers you are providing, I don't think you've thought any of these things through. GL with whatever.
- Fnoord 5y agoI have thought it through very well, and my logic is consistent. Acceptible or not depends on 1) if it is useful in the situation (traffic signs are, for driver safety; advertising isn't) 2) whether the receiver can block the ad with technology (not yet possible on road with advertising). You can ridicule me all you want. 33% of all internet users decided to use an ad blocker. They do not want to get distracted by silly skyscrapers, popups, flashy sounds, large irrelevant banners, and so on and so forth.