Transforming Debate for Inclusive and Impactful Participation
Objective: To empower thousands—or even millions—to contribute meaningfully to debates by leveraging structured organization and robust evaluation criteria. Together, we can ensure every voice is heard and every idea is thoughtfully considered.
# of reasons to agree with reasons to disagree: -0
Total Idea Score: +0
Don't like the score? It is easy to change the score. Just post a reason to agree or disagree with the overall idea, or any of the reasons and the score will change.
Chicago has the cloud gate which a giant mirror type reflective culture that is sort of in the shape of a bean, but underneath it does weird mirror reflections... It lets you take cool pictures of yourself with the Chicago Sky line.
Chicago has a frank gehry pavilion right in the middle of down town.
Chicago has a giant Picasso.
Chicago has a river that goes through it.
Chicago has more cool buildings, and more interesting architecture.
Denver has a blue bear that looks in a window for some reason.
Denver has murals, but to be fair they are mostly commercial in nature, promoting the building they are painted in.
Score:
# of reasons to agree: +0
# of reasons to disagree: -1
# of reasons to agree with reasons to agree: +0
# of reasons to agree with reasons to disagree: -3/2 = -1.5
Total Idea Score: -2.5
Don't like the score? It is easy to change the score. Just post a reason to agree or disagree with the overall idea, or any of the reasons and the score will change.
This picture is typical of the murals that you see in down town Denver. It is OK, but doesn't really compare to the art you see in Chicago. Its fine that Denver couldn't afford a large Picasso sculture, but if you want to see famous, or renowned public art, you should go to Chicago, not Denver.
They have similar cows in every big city that get painted for that city for some reaosn
Background Context and Assumptions Government shouldn't spend money on Public Art. Best reasons to agree: +5
This is just taking money from the poor and middle class to support the interest of the Rich.
If people want art in their lives they can buy it themselves. When government subsidizes art they have to make choices. The people making these choices are experts who are trying to make decisions for the public. They invariably look down on the public, because in general the public is not interested in spending much money on original art.
The buses that let more than one person out at a time are cool.
The Denver bus and train stops could easily be improved.
Reasons to agree:
Going to Denver buss stop is a free learn to smoke clinic. I'm surprised that they are not directly sponsored by Marlboro cigarettes.
I have been riding the train for about a year. I have been checked for a train ticket 3 times. When you don't check for train tickets, you get a lot of homeless people riding the trains. For this to work as a reason to support the belief that the trains should be improved, you have to first assume that they should be improved for those who are not homeless, and that the trains should not be free. Lets assume that we believe the trains should be payed for by those people that ride them, and that there should not be exceptions for the homeless. Lets assume that we all agree that the homeless are a subgroup of the very poor that are too poor to keep it together even a little bit, because most anyone should be able to keep it together for enough to live on government assistance with a little bit of help, and all those people who have mental health problems so bad that they can't keep it that much together, should be assisted in a facility where there needs should be met, and they shouldn't be riding public transportation as a way to pass the time, unless they have somewhere important to go, between care facilities, but even then people should probably be supervising them. I have only seen people having to talk a crazy drunk and high person 3 times in the last 9 months of riding the train, but that is too many times.
Reasons to disagree:
The convention center train stop is nice
Reasons to agree: +1
See the photos below, showing that the Convention Center train stop is pretty nice, has nice view, low ratio of homeless people, etc.
The outdoor mall on 16th street seems like sort of a bad idea. You have to get off your bike when your bike lane crosses it. But that is only because their are a lot of pedestrians going the other way, which is a good thing.
Reasons to Disagree
The lengths of 16th street mall are long enough that the buses are nice.
Homeless people make the 16th street outdoor mall feel less safe.
Outdoor malls in the suburbs, that are too far to walk to, are more resistant to the homeless. You have only two choices Denver: 1) Make a space welcoming to the homeless or 2) Make a space welcoming to Women and Children. You can't have it both ways. If you want to be welcoming to the homeless, you shouldn't do it in the middle of your city.
Denver could be more accommodating of pedestrians and bicyclist.
Reasons to Agree
Score:
# of reasons to agree: +1
# of reasons to disagree: -2
# of reasons to agree with reasons to agree: +0
# of reasons to agree with reasons to disagree: -3/2=-1.5
Total Idea Score: +-2.5
Don't like the score? It is easy to change the score. Just post a reason to agree or disagree with the overall idea, or any of the reasons and the score will change.
It shouldn't cost you tons to just get to a city. Until public transportation is much better, cities that don't want to exclude young or middle class individuals, should try to make parking affordable.
# of reasons to agree with reasons to disagree: -0
Total Idea Score: +1
Don't like the score? It is easy to change the score. Just post a reason to agree or disagree with the overall idea, or any of the reasons and the score will change.
Buildings don't always ruin a place's aesthetic beauty.
We shouldn't build if there is a delicate echo system, but it is OK if the echo system is strong.
It is better to build in beautiful places, so that people can enjoy them, than to build in productive farm land.
People who want to protect our beautiful places for future generations, should not try to keep them as prim-eval forest, but well cared for gardens. They can regulate the heck out of development, and only allow LEED certified, well thought out beautiful buildings. But a place's beauty should not automatically disqualify development, as long as the development is well thought out and managed, and public spaces are preserved for the poor to also enjoy the beauty.
Echo-tourism can be a sustainable way for us to fund wild-life habitat.
Our country needs, and will make money. We have choices. You can't make decisions in a vacuum. If we make more money from tourism, we won't have to make as much money from Natural Gas and Oil exploration.
We should have people live in our cities that we already have. We don't need to make new cities in our beautiful places.
Score:
# of reasons to agree: +6
# of reasons to disagree: -1
# of reasons to agree with reasons to agree: +0
# of reasons to agree with reasons to disagree: -0
Total Idea Score: +5
Don't like the score? It is easy to change the score. Just post a reason to agree or disagree with the overall idea, or any of the reasons and the score will change.
*Better will be different to different people. You can see my assumptions below. Obviously, employment opportunities, cultural events, and other opportunities are better in Chicago. But if your just a kids and don't care about anything in the summer time, but having nice weather to ride your bike around in, consider the discussion points below.
The comfort index (with higher numbers being better) is 68 in Boise, 57 in Denver, but only 47 in Chicago.
I attribute that to how windy it is in the winter, and how the humidity will really get you in the summer, which everyone knows, but also gets you (I assert) in the winter. Places that get lots of rain are nice to look at in the summer, with all the green plants, but they aren't as comfortable outside if your kids just want to be outside doing stuff...
Chicago has 189 sunny days, Boise Idaho has 206, only 17 more than Chicago.
While Denver has 246. The average in the USA is 205, but 17 days a year is 1/2 a month each year of sunny weather...
Boise only has 11.7" of rain, but Chicago has 35.9" of rain, or 3.1 tunes the amount of rain of Boise.
Of course if you are a farmer you might like the rain. However, if you have a back yard and are a kid, usually rain is not so great. Especially if your parents don't have a concrete floor that can be hosed off periodically. Denver gets 12.6".
Chicago gets 27.5". Boise gets about 70% as much with 19.5". Denver gets 54".
will say less is better. Especially because Boise is in the foothills and is much closer to world class skiing, snow mobiling, and anything that might make snow good. Boise does get enough to let you go sledding once a year, and gets many feet of snow in the mountains.
The Average high in July in Chicago is 83 and 90 in Boise. 86 in Denver. But it is a dry heat, and because of the high elevation it gets much cooler at night time, which makes sleeping comfortable. Megan hates (I think) summers in Chicago. Average January low is 22 in Boise and 18 in Chicago. So I guess Boise is 7 degrees hotter in summer and 4 degrees hotter in winter. Denver actually has a higher temperature in the Winter than Chicago, which surprises my friends from Chicago.
The springs are so rainy and short that you can't really enjoy them... It seems that you go strait from bitter cold to unbearable heat... The spring time is very painful, because you are dying to get outside after a long winter, but it is soo freakin rainy... No I'm not just talking about a little Seattle drizzle... it is a freakin torrential downpour. Rivers over-run their bounds, peoples basements get flooded... that just doesn't happen in Boise... Maybe it is because Lucky Peak dam stops the river from flooding. Maybe people in Boise are just smarter, and don't build their homes in flood planes, but every spring you hear about homes around the Chicago area getting flooded, so that the 1st level is almost completely under water. Maybe I just didn't pay attention when I was a kid, but I don't think that hardly ever happens in Idaho. Flash floods can kill campers who are near creeks... at least in the scouts that was a fear, but the girl who cleans my teeth's parents and aunt had their house totally covered with water with the stop sign out in-front of their street totally submerged...
Sure, if you live somewhere that gets lots of rain, you might get flooding. However, if you live in the West, your whole state might burn down each summer. So pick your poison: too much or not enough rain.
Denver get more snow than Chicago, which can be bad for traffic, but is good for skiing and sledding and stuff.
Because Chicago gets more rain, you see less places that are just left to go to weeds in Chicago. Everything is green, and generally people mow their grass in Chicago. In Denver, people don't water that grass, it dies, goes to weeds, and sometimes looks crappier than Chicago.
Score:
# of reasons to agree: +6
# of reasons to disagree: -3
# of reasons to agree with reasons to agree: +0
# of reasons to agree with reasons to disagree: -0
Total Idea Score: +3
Don't like the score? It is easy to change the score. Just post a reason to agree or disagree with the overall idea, or any of the reasons and the score will change.
Images that agree:
Our back yard turns to a pond every summer.
Bolingbrook is a bit like Venice Italy
Its kind of hard to see, but through the aches you can see the bleacher that are mostly covered.
Dan Price draws things he sees. Everyone's life is important. It is important to value your life, and to really look at the stuff around you. Sketching it force you to really see it, but sometimes art should do more... you can say important, powerful things visually... You can create something that makes people think, and act differently. Dan does this, but maybe it is more important to focus on doing a few really awesome paintings, or creations, instead of a exploring a whole bunch of new places... Its not like their is a right or a wrong... Every artist should do what their attention to detail, and boredom push them to do, but you shouldn't do all your art like Dan's.
