5 ms·

I wonder if there have been any social studies done regarding the apparent sense of entitlement that comes with operating any kind of vehicle. E-scooters are an

by elric 4y ago

I wonder if there have been any social studies done regarding the apparent sense of entitlement that comes with operating any kind of vehicle. E-scooters are an absolute menace nearly everywhere I've seen them being used, with their operators weaving between pedestrians and cars alike, and littering the kerb when unused. But the same is often true for bicycles, especially the fast electric kind, and it's certainly true for many cars. Only, cars have been given a special kind of kerb where they can take up space. For some reason, we've come to accept the dominant position of cars and the absolute entitlement (and douchebaggery!) that comes with it. But we seem to be unwilling to accept the same from bikes or scooters. I'm happy to accept the scooter menace if it means fewer cars on the road. And given how much of a nightmare traffic is in Paris, I'm surprised that Parisians don't seem to agree. But then I guess thes ones who voted against this probably feel entitled to their preferred mode of transport over all others ... ?

luxcem 4y ago
More than the usage, a lot voted against the business model and the nature of e-scooters. There are a environmental disaster, they get destroyed / lost after only a few months. They are found everywhere and especially in canals / the Seine. They also need a fleet of precarious workers at night to get recharged. The private e-scooters are not banned.
wink 4y ago
I think you're missing the fact that car infrastructure with curbside parking has evolved over decades, and cities have not managed to even provide ample parking space for standard bikes, as they have been in use for decades as well. Now these scooters just came into existence and over the course of 5-8 years have managed to clutter everything. They're not individuals' property (who would pick them up later) but they're owned and operated by a for-profit company and just being dropped anywhere by people. That's what makes it so very different. Not that I have a good solution for this, but we have some bikes by the local public transport org, and they have dedicated "parking stations" - if there were more of those (and the bikes wouldn't be more expensive than other rental bikes), or if they'd just nab a few car parking spaces for it.. then it would be nicer. Yes, it is very convenient to leave your scooter next to your door, but I don't think it would be outrageous to walk the last 200m.
- elric 4y ago
  It's true that infrastructure has evolved over decades. Though bicycles predate cars, and for various reasons we (as a society) decided to fuck bicycles and pander to cars. I'm not sure if the ownership vs rental argument holds much water. Bicycles routinely litter the kerb (and every other surface imaginable), even though they are usually owned rather than rented. Perhaps it's because they're relatively cheap? Or maybe it's an infrastructure problem after all?
  - wink 4y ago
    Maybe it depends what you see as "littering" - when I'm talking the city center here, without bike racks, people 99% line them up against the walls of the houses, or lock them on to streets signs, which are usually ~30cm from the curb next to the cars. I honestly can't remember when an actual non-rental, personal bike was in my way, so does not seem to be problem here, at all. If you define "they're all standing there", well, ok :P
    - elric 4y ago
      I guess that depends on where you live, which takes us back to this being an infrastructure problem after all. Where I live, if you're lucky, the kerb is 1m wide, and half of that width is often occupied by bikes (or scooters). Making things difficult for pedestrians, and impossible for wheelchair users.
- alistairSH 4y ago
  Pretty simple solution to the parking problem… repurpose one street parking space per block from a car to several bikes/scooters.
dijit 4y ago
It's also a problem of shared spaces. Pedestrians and Bikes are a poor mix. Bikes and Cars are a poor mix. but scooters and bikes seem to mix quite well. Malmo, Sweden; where I live, has excellent cycling infrastructure and the scooter "problem" is really miniscule. There are still issues, people parking in stupid ways or taking scooters into pedestrian areas, but overall there are significantly more dangerous drivers who hit the accelerator as hard as they can to reach the next red-light so that they can make the most noise possible. I have also noticed that there are a contingent of people who despise anyone having anything nice, and will throw the scooters into the canals, spray their QR codes, intentionally destroy the stands (which means they can't be parked reasonably) and, worse in my opinion, moving the scooters away from where they are safely parked and placing them across the sidewalk, which makes the previous rider look like an arse. The scooter companies try to combat this, but their combating sometimes has the inverse affect[0]. One thing has always been true though: you have to take a photo when you park so that your parking can be validated. [0]: https://blog.dijit.sh/enforcement-can-have-the-inverse-effect https://blog.dijit.sh/enforcement-can-have-the-inverse-effec...
- m000 4y ago
  > Malmo, Sweden; where I live, has excellent cycling infrastructure and the scooter "problem" is really miniscule. It could be that what can turn e-scooters from an amenity to a menace is tourism. Malmö would hardly be on the map as an international touristic destination. This means that e-scooter users are mostly locals. Which in turns means (a) that e-scooters would typically be a complementary mean of personal mobility, (b) there will be relatively few e-scooters. Paris OTOH, is #1 city tourist destination in the world. It also happens to have a lot of car traffic. This (a) makes moving with an e-scooter convenient, (b) makes deploying a huge number of e-scooters for-rent a very lucrative business, (c) the number of e-scooters is inflated to cater to the tourist clientele. Add to this that many tourists may be unfamiliar with Parisian traffic and norms, and you have a recipe for disaster.
  - dijit 4y ago
    Honestly, I think you make a really good point. The problem though, if taken to extremes would be to ban any form of car-rental (tourists are unfamiliar with the streets) and bike rental for similar reasons. I would add though, that it's possible to gate these things and the scooter companies seem willing to do it; in the US for example I couldn't use an e-scooter because the app wouldn't accept my European driving license. (and you must have a driving license to use them in California)
franky47 4y ago
If ever such a study is attempted, it should look into a correlation with vehicle mass, speed, and energy requirement from the operator.
cassepipe 4y ago
I should mention that it represent 80% of 7% of people that could vote. Basically people who don't like e scooters bothered to actually get out to a voting booth (no e-voting). Most inhabitants clearly didn't care enough.
dolmen 4y ago
> I'm happy to accept the scooter menace if it means fewer cars on the road. And given how much of a nightmare traffic is in Paris, I'm surprised that Parisians don't seem to agree. The Parisians were not asked about cars in this poll. Parisians are less and less car owners as street parking space is being reduced and private parkings are costly.
batmansmk 4y ago
Half of the reaction aren’t addressing the real vote results. Escooters aren’t banned. People voted against 3 different private companies littering the sidewalk. Paris’ inhabitants showed strong support of a public, off-the-curb scooter and bike infrastructure.
rocketbop 4y ago
The ban is on rental scooters only, so more aimed at discouraging carefree casual users and tourists than people who really want to use escooters as part of a commute etc
rlpb 4y ago
> and littering the kerb when unused I think that we have different standards here. Street parking for cars is the norm now, but it isn't altogether different in principle from people leaving e-scooters "in the way" on public roads and pavements either. I accept it's a bit different as others have pointed out, but given that we generally permit street parking for cars (subject to some rules), it seems reasonable that we should also permit e-scooters to be parked and it's on society to figure out what the rules for that should be.
- ilyt 4y ago
  Looking at amount of e-scooters kicked over I'd say society decided they do not have a place directly on the pedestrian/cycling path. Here they eventually forbid it altoghether and now companies have to use dedicated space, not just random patch of ground they find > Street parking for cars is the norm now, but it isn't altogether different in principle from people leaving e-scooters "in the way" on public roads and pavements either. The difference is that for the most cars it's someone's personal vehicle parked near where they live, while majority of the scooters are taxi-equivalent, with personal ones just being taken home. So in first case it's public space serving public, in second it's public space serving company's margins
  - rlpb 4y ago
    > The difference is that for the most cars it's someone's personal vehicle parked near where they live, while majority of the scooters are taxi-equivalent... I don't see why this distinction matters. In both cases, it's for the direct benefit of some individual, at a direct cost to others - especially those who do not benefit from and have no interest in subsidizing that particular mode of transport. In both cases, some companies profit from that (whether it's car sales and leases or e-scooter hire fees).
    - ilyt 4y ago
      The difference is taxes going into stuff the locals use vs some corporation gets for free. If they want to use public space to run their business they should pay.
ilyt 4y ago
> I'm happy to accept the scooter menace if it means fewer cars on the road. And given how much of a nightmare traffic is in Paris, I'm surprised that Parisians don't seem to agree. But then I guess thes ones who voted against this probably feel entitled to their preferred mode of transport over all others ... ? I'd imagine because they are not sharing space with cars but with pedestrians and cyclists. And this has nothing to do with entitlement, just plainly sense of danger. Those things can go at bicycle speeds with none of the breaking or manoeuvrer capability of one. The companies operating them were also essentially loitering, putting them wherever they wanted. At least here in Poland it was finally regulated and placed some limits on them (max speed, no zooming around on pedestrian routes etc.) but I can absolutely see why pedestrians or cyclists hated them. > I'm happy to accept the scooter menace if it means fewer cars on the road. And given how much of a nightmare traffic is in Paris, I'm surprised that Parisians don't seem to agree. But then I guess thes ones who voted against this probably feel entitled to their preferred mode of transport over all others ... ? It would be interesting experiment to open congested routes for 2 wheel vehicles only(let's say anything between classic scooter and bicycle), but frankly all of them is a misery to drive in proper winter so I'm kinda not surprised by people staying with their cars.
andrepd 4y ago
Two issues with that equivalence: (1) you can't compare a 15kg bike going 20kph with a 2000kg SUV going 70kph, and (2) the city is ENTIRELY designed for cars, with everything else as an afterthought (e.g. where pedestrians can walk is entirely determined around cars and their throughways). Yes, scooters shouldn't mix with pedestrians and they also shouldn't mix with cars. We'll where the fuck should they go? Governments seem permanently unwilling to sacrifice even a single lane of car traffic for a proper bike path / scooter path.
thetoon 4y ago
> I'm happy to accept the scooter menace if it means fewer cars on the road. At least here in Paris, it doesn't feel like scooters replace cars : the latter being mostly used to reach suburbs (and most of them actually originating from another suburb), while the former replaces long walks - at least journeys which would have been done by foot twenty years ago - or métro.
otabdeveloper4 4y ago
> For some reason, we've come to accept the dominant position of cars and the absolute entitlement (and douchebaggery!) that comes with it. But we seem to be unwilling to accept the same from bikes or scooters. Who's "we"? I'm pretty sure this isn't universal.
stev-0 4y ago
Parisians generally don’t travel by car.

by elric 4y ago

luxcem 4y ago

More than the usage, a lot voted against the business model and the nature of e-scooters. There are a environmental disaster, they get destroyed / lost after only a few months. They are found everywhere and especially in canals / the Seine. They also need a fleet of precarious workers at night to get recharged. The private e-scooters are not banned.

wink 4y ago

I think you're missing the fact that car infrastructure with curbside parking has evolved over decades, and cities have not managed to even provide ample parking space for standard bikes, as they have been in use for decades as well. Now these scooters just came into existence and over the course of 5-8 years have managed to clutter everything. They're not individuals' property (who would pick them up later) but they're owned and operated by a for-profit company and just being dropped anywhere by people. That's what makes it so very different. Not that I have a good solution for this, but we have some bikes by the local public transport org, and they have dedicated "parking stations" - if there were more of those (and the bikes wouldn't be more expensive than other rental bikes), or if they'd just nab a few car parking spaces for it.. then it would be nicer. Yes, it is very convenient to leave your scooter next to your door, but I don't think it would be outrageous to walk the last 200m.

elric 4y ago
It's true that infrastructure has evolved over decades. Though bicycles predate cars, and for various reasons we (as a society) decided to fuck bicycles and pander to cars. I'm not sure if the ownership vs rental argument holds much water. Bicycles routinely litter the kerb (and every other surface imaginable), even though they are usually owned rather than rented. Perhaps it's because they're relatively cheap? Or maybe it's an infrastructure problem after all?
- wink 4y ago
  Maybe it depends what you see as "littering" - when I'm talking the city center here, without bike racks, people 99% line them up against the walls of the houses, or lock them on to streets signs, which are usually ~30cm from the curb next to the cars. I honestly can't remember when an actual non-rental, personal bike was in my way, so does not seem to be problem here, at all. If you define "they're all standing there", well, ok :P
  - elric 4y ago
    I guess that depends on where you live, which takes us back to this being an infrastructure problem after all. Where I live, if you're lucky, the kerb is 1m wide, and half of that width is often occupied by bikes (or scooters). Making things difficult for pedestrians, and impossible for wheelchair users.
alistairSH 4y ago
Pretty simple solution to the parking problem… repurpose one street parking space per block from a car to several bikes/scooters.

dijit 4y ago

It's also a problem of shared spaces. Pedestrians and Bikes are a poor mix. Bikes and Cars are a poor mix. but scooters and bikes seem to mix quite well. Malmo, Sweden; where I live, has excellent cycling infrastructure and the scooter "problem" is really miniscule. There are still issues, people parking in stupid ways or taking scooters into pedestrian areas, but overall there are significantly more dangerous drivers who hit the accelerator as hard as they can to reach the next red-light so that they can make the most noise possible. I have also noticed that there are a contingent of people who despise anyone having anything nice, and will throw the scooters into the canals, spray their QR codes, intentionally destroy the stands (which means they can't be parked reasonably) and, worse in my opinion, moving the scooters away from where they are safely parked and placing them across the sidewalk, which makes the previous rider look like an arse. The scooter companies try to combat this, but their combating sometimes has the inverse affect[0]. One thing has always been true though: you have to take a photo when you park so that your parking can be validated. [0]: https://blog.dijit.sh/enforcement-can-have-the-inverse-effect https://blog.dijit.sh/enforcement-can-have-the-inverse-effec...

m000 4y ago
> Malmo, Sweden; where I live, has excellent cycling infrastructure and the scooter "problem" is really miniscule. It could be that what can turn e-scooters from an amenity to a menace is tourism. Malmö would hardly be on the map as an international touristic destination. This means that e-scooter users are mostly locals. Which in turns means (a) that e-scooters would typically be a complementary mean of personal mobility, (b) there will be relatively few e-scooters. Paris OTOH, is #1 city tourist destination in the world. It also happens to have a lot of car traffic. This (a) makes moving with an e-scooter convenient, (b) makes deploying a huge number of e-scooters for-rent a very lucrative business, (c) the number of e-scooters is inflated to cater to the tourist clientele. Add to this that many tourists may be unfamiliar with Parisian traffic and norms, and you have a recipe for disaster.
- dijit 4y ago
  Honestly, I think you make a really good point. The problem though, if taken to extremes would be to ban any form of car-rental (tourists are unfamiliar with the streets) and bike rental for similar reasons. I would add though, that it's possible to gate these things and the scooter companies seem willing to do it; in the US for example I couldn't use an e-scooter because the app wouldn't accept my European driving license. (and you must have a driving license to use them in California)

franky47 4y ago

If ever such a study is attempted, it should look into a correlation with vehicle mass, speed, and energy requirement from the operator.

cassepipe 4y ago

I should mention that it represent 80% of 7% of people that could vote. Basically people who don't like e scooters bothered to actually get out to a voting booth (no e-voting). Most inhabitants clearly didn't care enough.

dolmen 4y ago

> I'm happy to accept the scooter menace if it means fewer cars on the road. And given how much of a nightmare traffic is in Paris, I'm surprised that Parisians don't seem to agree. The Parisians were not asked about cars in this poll. Parisians are less and less car owners as street parking space is being reduced and private parkings are costly.

batmansmk 4y ago

Half of the reaction aren’t addressing the real vote results. Escooters aren’t banned. People voted against 3 different private companies littering the sidewalk. Paris’ inhabitants showed strong support of a public, off-the-curb scooter and bike infrastructure.

rocketbop 4y ago

The ban is on rental scooters only, so more aimed at discouraging carefree casual users and tourists than people who really want to use escooters as part of a commute etc

rlpb 4y ago

> and littering the kerb when unused I think that we have different standards here. Street parking for cars is the norm now, but it isn't altogether different in principle from people leaving e-scooters "in the way" on public roads and pavements either. I accept it's a bit different as others have pointed out, but given that we generally permit street parking for cars (subject to some rules), it seems reasonable that we should also permit e-scooters to be parked and it's on society to figure out what the rules for that should be.

ilyt 4y ago
Looking at amount of e-scooters kicked over I'd say society decided they do not have a place directly on the pedestrian/cycling path. Here they eventually forbid it altoghether and now companies have to use dedicated space, not just random patch of ground they find > Street parking for cars is the norm now, but it isn't altogether different in principle from people leaving e-scooters "in the way" on public roads and pavements either. The difference is that for the most cars it's someone's personal vehicle parked near where they live, while majority of the scooters are taxi-equivalent, with personal ones just being taken home. So in first case it's public space serving public, in second it's public space serving company's margins
- rlpb 4y ago
  > The difference is that for the most cars it's someone's personal vehicle parked near where they live, while majority of the scooters are taxi-equivalent... I don't see why this distinction matters. In both cases, it's for the direct benefit of some individual, at a direct cost to others - especially those who do not benefit from and have no interest in subsidizing that particular mode of transport. In both cases, some companies profit from that (whether it's car sales and leases or e-scooter hire fees).
  - ilyt 4y ago
    The difference is taxes going into stuff the locals use vs some corporation gets for free. If they want to use public space to run their business they should pay.

ilyt 4y ago

> I'm happy to accept the scooter menace if it means fewer cars on the road. And given how much of a nightmare traffic is in Paris, I'm surprised that Parisians don't seem to agree. But then I guess thes ones who voted against this probably feel entitled to their preferred mode of transport over all others ... ? I'd imagine because they are not sharing space with cars but with pedestrians and cyclists. And this has nothing to do with entitlement, just plainly sense of danger. Those things can go at bicycle speeds with none of the breaking or manoeuvrer capability of one. The companies operating them were also essentially loitering, putting them wherever they wanted. At least here in Poland it was finally regulated and placed some limits on them (max speed, no zooming around on pedestrian routes etc.) but I can absolutely see why pedestrians or cyclists hated them. > I'm happy to accept the scooter menace if it means fewer cars on the road. And given how much of a nightmare traffic is in Paris, I'm surprised that Parisians don't seem to agree. But then I guess thes ones who voted against this probably feel entitled to their preferred mode of transport over all others ... ? It would be interesting experiment to open congested routes for 2 wheel vehicles only(let's say anything between classic scooter and bicycle), but frankly all of them is a misery to drive in proper winter so I'm kinda not surprised by people staying with their cars.

andrepd 4y ago

Two issues with that equivalence: (1) you can't compare a 15kg bike going 20kph with a 2000kg SUV going 70kph, and (2) the city is ENTIRELY designed for cars, with everything else as an afterthought (e.g. where pedestrians can walk is entirely determined around cars and their throughways). Yes, scooters shouldn't mix with pedestrians and they also shouldn't mix with cars. We'll where the fuck should they go? Governments seem permanently unwilling to sacrifice even a single lane of car traffic for a proper bike path / scooter path.

thetoon 4y ago

> I'm happy to accept the scooter menace if it means fewer cars on the road. At least here in Paris, it doesn't feel like scooters replace cars : the latter being mostly used to reach suburbs (and most of them actually originating from another suburb), while the former replaces long walks - at least journeys which would have been done by foot twenty years ago - or métro.

otabdeveloper4 4y ago

> For some reason, we've come to accept the dominant position of cars and the absolute entitlement (and douchebaggery!) that comes with it. But we seem to be unwilling to accept the same from bikes or scooters. Who's "we"? I'm pretty sure this isn't universal.

stev-0 4y ago

Parisians generally don’t travel by car.