News:

Thank you for your patience during the Forum downtime while we upgraded the software. Welcome back and see this thread for some new features and other changes to the forum.

Main Menu

Connecticut "county equivalents" Probably Changing in 2023

Started by MikeTheActuary, December 13, 2021, 11:10:31 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

JayhawkCO

Quote from: Rothman on December 13, 2021, 04:20:18 PM


Quote from: jayhawkco on December 13, 2021, 03:44:34 PM
Quote from: Rothman on December 13, 2021, 03:33:20 PM
Quote from: jayhawkco on December 13, 2021, 03:29:15 PM
Quote from: Rothman on December 13, 2021, 03:20:13 PM
Quote from: jayhawkco on December 13, 2021, 01:31:25 PM
So basically if Oscar speaks, we listen.  I just got two more counties. :)
Not if you haven't visited them since their formation.  You can't visit something that doesn't exist yet.

Meh, if I've been to a town and that town is in a county, I've been to that county.
The county will not exist any longer, so no dice.  You visited something that will no longer exist.

Well then you're saying despite me having been to Connecticut (multiple times), since all of the counties are going to change, I will have been to Connecticut but have been to zero counties.  I'm choosing to not recognize Schrödinger's Connecticut.

Yep.  Have to go back and revisit Connecticut to clinch the new counties.

Last time you were in CT, you clinched the old counties.

As we do quite often, we will agree to disagree.  Next thing you'll be telling me is that if a city builds a new road somewhere, I haven't actually been to that city because the city itself has changed.  I don't go down that rabbit hole of pedantry. 


formulanone

Quote from: Rothman on December 13, 2021, 04:20:18 PM
Quote from: jayhawkco on December 13, 2021, 03:44:34 PM
Quote from: Rothman on December 13, 2021, 03:33:20 PM
Quote from: jayhawkco on December 13, 2021, 03:29:15 PM
Quote from: Rothman on December 13, 2021, 03:20:13 PM
Quote from: jayhawkco on December 13, 2021, 01:31:25 PM
So basically if Oscar speaks, we listen.  I just got two more counties. :)
Not if you haven't visited them since their formation.  You can't visit something that doesn't exist yet.

Meh, if I've been to a town and that town is in a county, I've been to that county.
The county will not exist any longer, so no dice.  You visited something that will no longer exist.

Well then you're saying despite me having been to Connecticut (multiple times), since all of the counties are going to change, I will have been to Connecticut but have been to zero counties.  I'm choosing to not recognize Schrödinger's Connecticut.

Yep.  Have to go back and revisit Connecticut to clinch the new counties.

Last time you were in CT, you clinched the old counties.

What if I mix the jar of Litchfield County dirt with the Hartford County soil? Does that count?

Rothman



Quote from: cabiness42 on December 13, 2021, 04:17:19 PM
Quote from: jayhawkco on December 13, 2021, 03:44:34 PM
Quote from: Rothman on December 13, 2021, 03:33:20 PM
Quote from: jayhawkco on December 13, 2021, 03:29:15 PM
Quote from: Rothman on December 13, 2021, 03:20:13 PM
Quote from: jayhawkco on December 13, 2021, 01:31:25 PM
So basically if Oscar speaks, we listen.  I just got two more counties. :)
Not if you haven't visited them since their formation.  You can't visit something that doesn't exist yet.

Meh, if I've been to a town and that town is in a county, I've been to that county.
The county will not exist any longer, so no dice.  You visited something that will no longer exist.

Well then you're saying despite me having been to Connecticut (multiple times), since all of the counties are going to change, I will have been to Connecticut but have been to zero counties.  I'm choosing to not recognize Schrödinger's Connecticut.

This is how I look at it: Specific to Connecticut, there are no longer formal county-level subdivisions. To hold to the true definition of counties, you had to visit Connecticut before 1960 or else you've never been to any counties in Connecticut. What has existed since 1960 are county-equivalent subdivisions that happen to be identical to the counties that used to exist. When you've documented your travel since 1960, you've documented which of these areas you've been to. What is happening is that the Census Bureau and others are changing the boundaries of their county-equivalent subdivisions at the request of the state. Since there weren't really counties before this change, I'm clearly in the camp of counting the new areas as visited if you've ever visited any portion of that area before the change.

Your conclusion is the exact opposite of what your argument supports.  New county equivalents means having to go back and clinch them.

This is not a mere boundary change, but whole new divisions being created with new names and structures.

Please note: All comments here represent my own personal opinion and do not reflect the official position(s) of NYSDOT.

Rothman

Quote from: formulanone on December 13, 2021, 04:22:02 PM
Quote from: Rothman on December 13, 2021, 04:20:18 PM
Quote from: jayhawkco on December 13, 2021, 03:44:34 PM
Quote from: Rothman on December 13, 2021, 03:33:20 PM
Quote from: jayhawkco on December 13, 2021, 03:29:15 PM
Quote from: Rothman on December 13, 2021, 03:20:13 PM
Quote from: jayhawkco on December 13, 2021, 01:31:25 PM
So basically if Oscar speaks, we listen.  I just got two more counties. :)
Not if you haven't visited them since their formation.  You can't visit something that doesn't exist yet.

Meh, if I've been to a town and that town is in a county, I've been to that county.
The county will not exist any longer, so no dice.  You visited something that will no longer exist.

Well then you're saying despite me having been to Connecticut (multiple times), since all of the counties are going to change, I will have been to Connecticut but have been to zero counties.  I'm choosing to not recognize Schrödinger's Connecticut.

Yep.  Have to go back and revisit Connecticut to clinch the new counties.

Last time you were in CT, you clinched the old counties.

What if I mix the jar of Litchfield County dirt with the Hartford County soil? Does that count?
You madman!
Please note: All comments here represent my own personal opinion and do not reflect the official position(s) of NYSDOT.

Rothman

Quote from: jayhawkco on December 13, 2021, 04:20:49 PM
Quote from: cabiness42 on December 13, 2021, 04:17:19 PM
Quote from: jayhawkco on December 13, 2021, 03:44:34 PM
Quote from: Rothman on December 13, 2021, 03:33:20 PM
Quote from: jayhawkco on December 13, 2021, 03:29:15 PM
Quote from: Rothman on December 13, 2021, 03:20:13 PM
Quote from: jayhawkco on December 13, 2021, 01:31:25 PM
So basically if Oscar speaks, we listen.  I just got two more counties. :)
Not if you haven't visited them since their formation.  You can't visit something that doesn't exist yet.

Meh, if I've been to a town and that town is in a county, I've been to that county.
The county will not exist any longer, so no dice.  You visited something that will no longer exist.

Well then you're saying despite me having been to Connecticut (multiple times), since all of the counties are going to change, I will have been to Connecticut but have been to zero counties.  I'm choosing to not recognize Schrödinger's Connecticut.

This is how I look at it: Specific to Connecticut, there are no longer formal county-level subdivisions. To hold to the true definition of counties, you had to visit Connecticut before 1960 or else you've never been to any counties in Connecticut. What has existed since 1960 are county-equivalent subdivisions that happen to be identical to the counties that used to exist. When you've documented your travel since 1960, you've documented which of these areas you've been to. What is happening is that the Census Bureau and others are changing the boundaries of their county-equivalent subdivisions at the request of the state. Since there weren't really counties before this change, I'm clearly in the camp of counting the new areas as visited if you've ever visited any portion of that area before the change.

Now, if a state with actual counties were to split a county into two, creating a new county with a new county government and a new county seat, I can see not counting visiting that area before the county existed.

I look at it that if I've been present in a place, I've "clinched" being there.  If a county splits, just like Scott said above, if I haven't been anywhere in the new area, I haven't been to that county. 

If Wales secedes from the U.K., despite me having been to the U.K., I will not have been to Wales because I've never been to Cardiff, Swansea, or any other Welsh city.  If Scotland secedes, I have been to Edinburgh, Glasgow, Inverness, and multiple other Scottish cities, ergo, I've been to Scotland.
Cheater.
Please note: All comments here represent my own personal opinion and do not reflect the official position(s) of NYSDOT.

TheHighwayMan3561

The beauty of this whole discussion is that Rothman's rules are no more or any less valid than jayhawkco's, mine, oscar's, or anyone else's. It makes for fun arguments though.  :popcorn:
self-certified as the dumbest person on this board for 5 years running

formulanone

Quote from: Rothman on December 13, 2021, 04:22:52 PM
Quote from: formulanone on December 13, 2021, 04:22:02 PM
Quote from: Rothman on December 13, 2021, 04:20:18 PM
Quote from: jayhawkco on December 13, 2021, 03:44:34 PM
Quote from: Rothman on December 13, 2021, 03:33:20 PM
Quote from: jayhawkco on December 13, 2021, 03:29:15 PM
Quote from: Rothman on December 13, 2021, 03:20:13 PM
Quote from: jayhawkco on December 13, 2021, 01:31:25 PM
So basically if Oscar speaks, we listen.  I just got two more counties. :)
Not if you haven't visited them since their formation.  You can't visit something that doesn't exist yet.

Meh, if I've been to a town and that town is in a county, I've been to that county.
The county will not exist any longer, so no dice.  You visited something that will no longer exist.

Well then you're saying despite me having been to Connecticut (multiple times), since all of the counties are going to change, I will have been to Connecticut but have been to zero counties.  I'm choosing to not recognize Schrödinger's Connecticut.

Yep.  Have to go back and revisit Connecticut to clinch the new counties.

Last time you were in CT, you clinched the old counties.

What if I mix the jar of Litchfield County dirt with the Hartford County soil? Does that count?
You madman!

I am not responsible for any hydrogen ions that are released in the process.

NWI_Irish96

Quote from: Rothman on December 13, 2021, 04:22:23 PM


Quote from: cabiness42 on December 13, 2021, 04:17:19 PM
Quote from: jayhawkco on December 13, 2021, 03:44:34 PM
Quote from: Rothman on December 13, 2021, 03:33:20 PM
Quote from: jayhawkco on December 13, 2021, 03:29:15 PM
Quote from: Rothman on December 13, 2021, 03:20:13 PM
Quote from: jayhawkco on December 13, 2021, 01:31:25 PM
So basically if Oscar speaks, we listen.  I just got two more counties. :)
Not if you haven't visited them since their formation.  You can't visit something that doesn't exist yet.

Meh, if I've been to a town and that town is in a county, I've been to that county.
The county will not exist any longer, so no dice.  You visited something that will no longer exist.

Well then you're saying despite me having been to Connecticut (multiple times), since all of the counties are going to change, I will have been to Connecticut but have been to zero counties.  I'm choosing to not recognize Schrödinger's Connecticut.

This is how I look at it: Specific to Connecticut, there are no longer formal county-level subdivisions. To hold to the true definition of counties, you had to visit Connecticut before 1960 or else you've never been to any counties in Connecticut. What has existed since 1960 are county-equivalent subdivisions that happen to be identical to the counties that used to exist. When you've documented your travel since 1960, you've documented which of these areas you've been to. What is happening is that the Census Bureau and others are changing the boundaries of their county-equivalent subdivisions at the request of the state. Since there weren't really counties before this change, I'm clearly in the camp of counting the new areas as visited if you've ever visited any portion of that area before the change.

Your conclusion is the exact opposite of what your argument supports.  New county equivalents means having to go back and clinch them.

This is not a mere boundary change, but whole new divisions being created with new names and structures.



The new divisions don't really have new structures though. They're just grouping towns differently. It really is just a mere boundary change, and really it's arbitrary as to whether the Census Bureau or mob rule or anybody else adopts those changes.
Indiana: counties 100%, highways 100%
Illinois: counties 100%, highways 61%
Michigan: counties 100%, highways 56%
Wisconsin: counties 86%, highways 23%

Rothman

Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on December 13, 2021, 04:23:56 PM
The beauty of this whole discussion is that Rothman's rules are no more or any less valid than jayhawkco's, mine, oscar's, or anyone else's. It makes for fun arguments though.  :popcorn:

Please note: All comments here represent my own personal opinion and do not reflect the official position(s) of NYSDOT.

Rothman

Quote from: cabiness42 on December 13, 2021, 04:25:22 PM
Quote from: Rothman on December 13, 2021, 04:22:23 PM


Quote from: cabiness42 on December 13, 2021, 04:17:19 PM
Quote from: jayhawkco on December 13, 2021, 03:44:34 PM
Quote from: Rothman on December 13, 2021, 03:33:20 PM
Quote from: jayhawkco on December 13, 2021, 03:29:15 PM
Quote from: Rothman on December 13, 2021, 03:20:13 PM
Quote from: jayhawkco on December 13, 2021, 01:31:25 PM
So basically if Oscar speaks, we listen.  I just got two more counties. :)
Not if you haven't visited them since their formation.  You can't visit something that doesn't exist yet.

Meh, if I've been to a town and that town is in a county, I've been to that county.
The county will not exist any longer, so no dice.  You visited something that will no longer exist.

Well then you're saying despite me having been to Connecticut (multiple times), since all of the counties are going to change, I will have been to Connecticut but have been to zero counties.  I'm choosing to not recognize Schrödinger's Connecticut.

This is how I look at it: Specific to Connecticut, there are no longer formal county-level subdivisions. To hold to the true definition of counties, you had to visit Connecticut before 1960 or else you've never been to any counties in Connecticut. What has existed since 1960 are county-equivalent subdivisions that happen to be identical to the counties that used to exist. When you've documented your travel since 1960, you've documented which of these areas you've been to. What is happening is that the Census Bureau and others are changing the boundaries of their county-equivalent subdivisions at the request of the state. Since there weren't really counties before this change, I'm clearly in the camp of counting the new areas as visited if you've ever visited any portion of that area before the change.

Your conclusion is the exact opposite of what your argument supports.  New county equivalents means having to go back and clinch them.

This is not a mere boundary change, but whole new divisions being created with new names and structures.



The new divisions don't really have new structures though. They're just grouping towns differently. It really is just a mere boundary change, and really it's arbitrary as to whether the Census Bureau or mob rule or anybody else adopts those changes.

They are called Councils of Government and therefore are indeed councils of the individual governments.  It is not just a boundary change, especially when you take into account all the name changes occurring because of this.
Please note: All comments here represent my own personal opinion and do not reflect the official position(s) of NYSDOT.

MikeTheActuary

I've been to all of Connecticut's towns.   I'm comfortable claiming credit for whatever divisions might be defined for CT...although I probably will take a quick lap around the state in January 2023 just to be certain.  ;)

JayhawkCO

Quote from: Rothman on December 13, 2021, 04:23:41 PM
Quote from: jayhawkco on December 13, 2021, 04:20:49 PM
Quote from: cabiness42 on December 13, 2021, 04:17:19 PM
Quote from: jayhawkco on December 13, 2021, 03:44:34 PM
Quote from: Rothman on December 13, 2021, 03:33:20 PM
Quote from: jayhawkco on December 13, 2021, 03:29:15 PM
Quote from: Rothman on December 13, 2021, 03:20:13 PM
Quote from: jayhawkco on December 13, 2021, 01:31:25 PM
So basically if Oscar speaks, we listen.  I just got two more counties. :)
Not if you haven't visited them since their formation.  You can't visit something that doesn't exist yet.

Meh, if I've been to a town and that town is in a county, I've been to that county.
The county will not exist any longer, so no dice.  You visited something that will no longer exist.

Well then you're saying despite me having been to Connecticut (multiple times), since all of the counties are going to change, I will have been to Connecticut but have been to zero counties.  I'm choosing to not recognize Schrödinger's Connecticut.

This is how I look at it: Specific to Connecticut, there are no longer formal county-level subdivisions. To hold to the true definition of counties, you had to visit Connecticut before 1960 or else you've never been to any counties in Connecticut. What has existed since 1960 are county-equivalent subdivisions that happen to be identical to the counties that used to exist. When you've documented your travel since 1960, you've documented which of these areas you've been to. What is happening is that the Census Bureau and others are changing the boundaries of their county-equivalent subdivisions at the request of the state. Since there weren't really counties before this change, I'm clearly in the camp of counting the new areas as visited if you've ever visited any portion of that area before the change.

Now, if a state with actual counties were to split a county into two, creating a new county with a new county government and a new county seat, I can see not counting visiting that area before the county existed.

I look at it that if I've been present in a place, I've "clinched" being there.  If a county splits, just like Scott said above, if I haven't been anywhere in the new area, I haven't been to that county. 

If Wales secedes from the U.K., despite me having been to the U.K., I will not have been to Wales because I've never been to Cardiff, Swansea, or any other Welsh city.  If Scotland secedes, I have been to Edinburgh, Glasgow, Inverness, and multiple other Scottish cities, ergo, I've been to Scotland.
Cheater.

At least I'm not counting county roads on my "Lowest Number" count.  The audacity.  :)

MikeTheActuary

Quote from: Rothman on December 13, 2021, 04:28:49 PM
They are called Councils of Government and therefore are indeed councils of the individual governments.  It is not just a boundary change, especially when you take into account all the name changes occurring because of this.

The COGs have been around for many years (although they do have an unfortunate habit of evolving over time).   The actual change here is that they're going to be recognized as the de facto counties they are, rather than the official counties that were abolished many years ago.

Rothman

Quote from: jayhawkco on December 13, 2021, 04:35:29 PM
Quote from: Rothman on December 13, 2021, 04:23:41 PM
Quote from: jayhawkco on December 13, 2021, 04:20:49 PM
Quote from: cabiness42 on December 13, 2021, 04:17:19 PM
Quote from: jayhawkco on December 13, 2021, 03:44:34 PM
Quote from: Rothman on December 13, 2021, 03:33:20 PM
Quote from: jayhawkco on December 13, 2021, 03:29:15 PM
Quote from: Rothman on December 13, 2021, 03:20:13 PM
Quote from: jayhawkco on December 13, 2021, 01:31:25 PM
So basically if Oscar speaks, we listen.  I just got two more counties. :)
Not if you haven't visited them since their formation.  You can't visit something that doesn't exist yet.

Meh, if I've been to a town and that town is in a county, I've been to that county.
The county will not exist any longer, so no dice.  You visited something that will no longer exist.

Well then you're saying despite me having been to Connecticut (multiple times), since all of the counties are going to change, I will have been to Connecticut but have been to zero counties.  I'm choosing to not recognize Schrödinger's Connecticut.

This is how I look at it: Specific to Connecticut, there are no longer formal county-level subdivisions. To hold to the true definition of counties, you had to visit Connecticut before 1960 or else you've never been to any counties in Connecticut. What has existed since 1960 are county-equivalent subdivisions that happen to be identical to the counties that used to exist. When you've documented your travel since 1960, you've documented which of these areas you've been to. What is happening is that the Census Bureau and others are changing the boundaries of their county-equivalent subdivisions at the request of the state. Since there weren't really counties before this change, I'm clearly in the camp of counting the new areas as visited if you've ever visited any portion of that area before the change.

Now, if a state with actual counties were to split a county into two, creating a new county with a new county government and a new county seat, I can see not counting visiting that area before the county existed.

I look at it that if I've been present in a place, I've "clinched" being there.  If a county splits, just like Scott said above, if I haven't been anywhere in the new area, I haven't been to that county. 

If Wales secedes from the U.K., despite me having been to the U.K., I will not have been to Wales because I've never been to Cardiff, Swansea, or any other Welsh city.  If Scotland secedes, I have been to Edinburgh, Glasgow, Inverness, and multiple other Scottish cities, ergo, I've been to Scotland.
Cheater.

At least I'm not counting county roads on my "Lowest Number" count.  The audacity.  :)
On this, we are united.
Please note: All comments here represent my own personal opinion and do not reflect the official position(s) of NYSDOT.

Rothman

Quote from: MikeTheActuary on December 13, 2021, 04:35:57 PM
Quote from: Rothman on December 13, 2021, 04:28:49 PM
They are called Councils of Government and therefore are indeed councils of the individual governments.  It is not just a boundary change, especially when you take into account all the name changes occurring because of this.

The COGs have been around for many years (although they do have an unfortunate habit of evolving over time).   The actual change here is that they're going to be recognized as the de facto counties they are, rather than the official counties that were abolished many years ago.
Right.  They won't actually be county equivalents until 2023.  Until then, they are not.
Please note: All comments here represent my own personal opinion and do not reflect the official position(s) of NYSDOT.

MikeTheActuary

Quote from: Scott5114 on December 13, 2021, 04:06:01 PM
I remember reading on one of the sites of Old Roadgeek Canon–I'm thinking it was somewhere on mob-rule but it could have been on the Extra Miler Club's site, but I can't find it now–that stated their suggested rule for county splits was, if you visited the territory that remained in the old county, you get credit for only that old county. If you visited territory that ended up in the new county, you would get credit for both counties (because you visited the land that is in the new county and you also visited the jurisdiction that at the time covered that land and but now no longer does).

This would seem to imply that in the event of a complete boundary redraw, land visited would govern, and the lack of continuity of jurisdiction would be irrelevant. Taken to its logical conclusions, continuity of jurisdiction as the governing factor could lead to absurd results anyway, such as a clinch depending on things like whether a city-county merger was legally implemented as one government subsuming the other, or both being discontinued and a new government entity being formed with the same jurisdictional boundaries as the old one. That level of rules-lawyering is horseshit, so if I had visited Connecticut, I'd be filling in my mob-rule map based on "I was on X road before the redraw, and it is now in Y county, so I am marking that as visited".

It's worth remembering also that for most of us county-collecting is a personal goal.  There aren't any official rules other than the ones we set for our individual quests.  Consider the number of folks who don't consider themselves as having visited a jurisdiction unless they've visited the capital/county seat, or unless they've transacted business there / who don't count just having "driven through".

I have the same recollection of the old canon about how to count counties.  However, I've chosen not to follow that rule, and instead go by where have I actually, physically been.   My original visit to Boulder County, Colorado was limited to that part which is now found in Broomfield County.  Thus when Broomfield was formed, I counted Broomfield and needed to go revisit Boulder.

Contrast that to county-hunting on amateur radio, where we go by county names (since it's not practical to have precise geographic coordinates for every contact, and since there is a formal award requiring documentation involved)....and in 2023, I'll have to start all over again with Connecticut county-equivalents.

formulanone

Quote from: jayhawkco on December 13, 2021, 04:35:29 PM
At least I'm not counting county roads on my "Lowest Number" count.  The audacity.  :)

Them's fightin' words! Just remember that Colorado is flatter than Alabama...

(But not really.)

Scott5114

Quote from: MikeTheActuary on December 13, 2021, 05:05:33 PM
Quote from: Scott5114 on December 13, 2021, 04:06:01 PM
I remember reading on one of the sites of Old Roadgeek Canon–I'm thinking it was somewhere on mob-rule but it could have been on the Extra Miler Club's site, but I can't find it now–that stated their suggested rule for county splits was, if you visited the territory that remained in the old county, you get credit for only that old county. If you visited territory that ended up in the new county, you would get credit for both counties (because you visited the land that is in the new county and you also visited the jurisdiction that at the time covered that land and but now no longer does).

This would seem to imply that in the event of a complete boundary redraw, land visited would govern, and the lack of continuity of jurisdiction would be irrelevant. Taken to its logical conclusions, continuity of jurisdiction as the governing factor could lead to absurd results anyway, such as a clinch depending on things like whether a city-county merger was legally implemented as one government subsuming the other, or both being discontinued and a new government entity being formed with the same jurisdictional boundaries as the old one. That level of rules-lawyering is horseshit, so if I had visited Connecticut, I'd be filling in my mob-rule map based on "I was on X road before the redraw, and it is now in Y county, so I am marking that as visited".

It's worth remembering also that for most of us county-collecting is a personal goal.  There aren't any official rules other than the ones we set for our individual quests.  Consider the number of folks who don't consider themselves as having visited a jurisdiction unless they've visited the capital/county seat, or unless they've transacted business there / who don't count just having "driven through".

I have the same recollection of the old canon about how to count counties.  However, I've chosen not to follow that rule, and instead go by where have I actually, physically been.   My original visit to Boulder County, Colorado was limited to that part which is now found in Broomfield County.  Thus when Broomfield was formed, I counted Broomfield and needed to go revisit Boulder.

Indeed. I tend to follow the laziest interpretation of the rules as possible, since for me the goal isn't necessarily bragging rights as it is simply tracking the places I have and haven't experienced firsthand. If I feel like I got some kind of firsthand experience with a county, I will count it, even if its boundaries change later on. Going back to a far-away region I've already been to, and seeing the same thing that I saw before, just because the state decided to redraw its boundaries sounds boring, so I'm not going to do it.

Likewise, I don't follow the rule some people do that mandates a stop or a transaction somewhere–a buying a candy bar at a gas station in Deer Antler County is going to be no different of an experience than buying one back home, so I don't waste time with that. (I will grudgingly admit that people who have the "must visit county seat" restriction have a point, since the county seat is usually the most interesting town in any given county, even if I don't follow that restriction myself.)

I don't just follow this philosophy in travel goals, for what it's worth. For example, there's a video game I consider myself to have 100%ed, although one of the levels I've never technically completed. I had the level more or less beaten, but a glitch blocked my way and made the level unwinnable. I just looked up a level code to skip to the next level, because as far as I was concerned I had done all the things to successfully solve the level and I was not going to experience anything new or interesting by starting the level over again so I could beat it to the game's satisfaction.
uncontrollable freak sardine salad chef

Molandfreak

Quote from: Rothman on December 13, 2021, 03:33:20 PM
Quote from: jayhawkco on December 13, 2021, 03:29:15 PM
Quote from: Rothman on December 13, 2021, 03:20:13 PM
Quote from: jayhawkco on December 13, 2021, 01:31:25 PM
So basically if Oscar speaks, we listen.  I just got two more counties. :)
Not if you haven't visited them since their formation.  You can't visit something that doesn't exist yet.

Meh, if I've been to a town and that town is in a county, I've been to that county.
The county will not exist any longer, so no dice.  You visited something that will no longer exist.
So if somebody had been to Oglala Lakota County, South Dakota before 2015, would you say "nope, doesn't count, you've been to Shannon County, South Dakota" even though it's the same county?
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on December 05, 2023, 08:24:57 PM
AASHTO attributes 28.5% of highway inventory shrink to bad road fan social media posts.

Rothman

Quote from: Molandfreak on December 13, 2021, 07:27:40 PM
Quote from: Rothman on December 13, 2021, 03:33:20 PM
Quote from: jayhawkco on December 13, 2021, 03:29:15 PM
Quote from: Rothman on December 13, 2021, 03:20:13 PM
Quote from: jayhawkco on December 13, 2021, 01:31:25 PM
So basically if Oscar speaks, we listen.  I just got two more counties. :)
Not if you haven't visited them since their formation.  You can't visit something that doesn't exist yet.

Meh, if I've been to a town and that town is in a county, I've been to that county.
The county will not exist any longer, so no dice.  You visited something that will no longer exist.
So if somebody had been to Oglala Lakota County, South Dakota before 2015, would you say "nope, doesn't count, you've been to Shannon County, South Dakota" even though it's the same county?

Sure.  Why not?
Please note: All comments here represent my own personal opinion and do not reflect the official position(s) of NYSDOT.

jp the roadgeek

To make it easier, I'd just name them as counties.  Obviously, the Tolland and Windham names would have to be retired, as they are now part of the same area as another city that serves as a county's namesake.  Here's what I'd go with (new names in italics

Northwest Hills: Litchfield
Capitol Region: Hartford
Northeastern: Putnam
Western: Greenwich
Metropolitan: Fairfield
Naugatuck Valley: Naugatuck
South Central: New Haven
Lower CT River Valley: Middlesex
Southeastern: New London
Interstates I've clinched: 97, 290 (MA), 291 (CT), 291 (MA), 293, 295 (DE-NJ-PA), 295 (RI-MA), 384, 391, 395 (CT-MA), 395 (MD), 495 (DE), 610 (LA), 684, 691, 695 (MD), 695 (NY), 795 (MD)

Rothman

Quote from: jp the roadgeek on December 13, 2021, 09:32:06 PM
To make it easier, I'd just name them as counties.  Obviously, the Tolland and Windham names would have to be retired, as they are now part of the same area as another city that serves as a county's namesake.  Here's what I'd go with (new names in italics

Northwest Hills: Litchfield
Capitol Region: Hartford
Northeastern: Putnam
Western: Greenwich
Metropolitan: Fairfield
Naugatuck Valley: Naugatuck
South Central: New Haven
Lower CT River Valley: Middlesex
Southeastern: New London
No.  The COGs are what they are.  No changing the names willy-nilly.
Please note: All comments here represent my own personal opinion and do not reflect the official position(s) of NYSDOT.

Scott5114

Quote from: Rothman on December 13, 2021, 09:58:09 PM
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on December 13, 2021, 09:32:06 PM
To make it easier, I'd just name them as counties.  Obviously, the Tolland and Windham names would have to be retired, as they are now part of the same area as another city that serves as a county's namesake.  Here's what I'd go with (new names in italics

Northwest Hills: Litchfield
Capitol Region: Hartford
Northeastern: Putnam
Western: Greenwich
Metropolitan: Fairfield
Naugatuck Valley: Naugatuck
South Central: New Haven
Lower CT River Valley: Middlesex
Southeastern: New London
No.  The COGs are what they are.  No changing the names willy-nilly.

Northwest Hills: Antillinois
Capitol Region: Shirley
Northeastern: Southwestern
Western: Green Witch
Metropolitan: Shadyfield
Naugatuck Valley: Rothman Commemoratively Renamed County
South Central: Green Witch 2
Lower CT River Valley: Metalsax
Southeastern: Kind Of Middle Aged London
uncontrollable freak sardine salad chef

Rothman

Quote from: Scott5114 on December 13, 2021, 11:05:07 PM
Quote from: Rothman on December 13, 2021, 09:58:09 PM
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on December 13, 2021, 09:32:06 PM
To make it easier, I'd just name them as counties.  Obviously, the Tolland and Windham names would have to be retired, as they are now part of the same area as another city that serves as a county's namesake.  Here's what I'd go with (new names in italics

Northwest Hills: Litchfield
Capitol Region: Hartford
Northeastern: Putnam
Western: Greenwich
Metropolitan: Fairfield
Naugatuck Valley: Naugatuck
South Central: New Haven
Lower CT River Valley: Middlesex
Southeastern: New London
No.  The COGs are what they are.  No changing the names willy-nilly.

Northwest Hills: Antillinois
Capitol Region: Shirley
Northeastern: Southwestern
Western: Green Witch
Metropolitan: Shadyfield
Naugatuck Valley: Rothman Commemoratively Renamed County
South Central: Green Witch 2
Lower CT River Valley: Metalsax
Southeastern: Kind Of Middle Aged London
Then again, those I can accept.
Please note: All comments here represent my own personal opinion and do not reflect the official position(s) of NYSDOT.

hotdogPi

Clinched, minus I-93 (I'm missing a few miles and my file is incorrect)

Traveled, plus US 13, 44, and 50, and several state routes

I will be in Burlington VT for the eclipse.



Opinions expressed here on belong solely to the poster and do not represent or reflect the opinions or beliefs of AARoads, its creators and/or associates.