Unpopular Anything Road-Related Opinions

[Rothman]

Makes me think of Acadia, where the free portion of the park, including Cadillac Mountain, is overrun and the crowds along the paid portion of the tour road are fewer in number.  Last time I was there, the difference was surprising.

Cadillac Mountain was very busy when I visited (in 2021), but it wasn't free. We had to buy tickets well in advance.

Ah yes, they have a ticket system now.

[Rothman]

I have seen/know plenty of people who will go to a National Park and spend the entire time trying to get a perfect "Instagram" photo while ignoring the park around them.

They've told you this?  Or you accompanied them?  How do you know?

And, call me skeptical, but how many of these people do you know?  I'm curious to see you quantify "plenty of people".

I'm not doubting there are people who do this.  But I doubt they represent anything but a small minority of visitors.  During my last several visits to national parks, I can't recall seeing anyone who fits your caricature.  Perhaps the closest thing would be a couple of young ladies who travel the country in their outfitted vehicle and post about their travels online;  even there, though, they stayed the night in the campground, and I believe they did at least some hiking.  Everyone else I've encountered has been there to hike, to relax, to get away with friends or coworkers for the weekend, to enjoy the scenery–you know, exactly the same reasons as thirty years ago.

Hell, there was a Simpsons episode not long back lampooning this behavior, so I know I'm not the only one to observe it.

Exactly, it's lampooning.  It's an exaggeration.  It's taking a small nugget of truth on the periphery of reality and blowing it out of proportion for comedic effect.

Mixture of both. People I have traveled with, sometimes just talked to. And often you can tell by their trip photos. Someone goes to what is supposedly a great natural wonder, and they are in every photo, often blocking half of the thing out of view. Its clear its about them not the place.

What's it to you?

[formulanone]

The data says otherwise. The furthest back records go for Yellowstone are from 1991, but in that year there were under 3 million visits. The average across the last 7 years or so is over 4 million.
That may not sound like much, but it means the parks are now 33% more crowded.

Also in that trend: people are living longer, still tired of being indoors, enjoy seeing things they can't get back home, tourism is a thing, travel is still desirable, and people are up all night to get lucky, ergo...even more people.

It might be a few million more years until the next national park or Great Beautiful Amazing Geologic Thing is actually formed.

But its worse than that. Not only are more people going, but they are going less and less for the genuine experience of the park and more and more for the purpose of posting about it on the internet. You said it yourself, "no one was posting about their exploits on Facebook or Instagram", they were going for different reasons.

Again, how are you to decide how someone enjoys something? I betcha more people are sharing their experiences around a fireplace than around a slide projector.

The big fallacy comes from the masses thinking that because one doesn't take the same risks as another individual, that they are somehow not living a complete life or surpassing the same artificial thresholds. It could be they're more adept at handling their individual goals or living this silly game by another interpretation of the rule book.

[Quillz]

Never understood the mentality of "people should visit national parks and never share it on the Internet." Why does it matter to you if someone goes to a national park and shares it on Instagram? Like, seriously, who cares? I've gone to plenty of places where half the time, it's just getting there that I enjoy, less so the actual destination. Is my experience somehow not genuine or less fulfilling than someone else's?

Guess what... people like to use the Internet and share their experiences. It harms no one. Frankly it works as great advertising for the national parks.

[Max Rockatansky]

Never understood the mentality of "people should visit national parks and never share it on the Internet." Why does it matter to you if someone goes to a national park and shares it on Instagram? Like, seriously, who cares? I've gone to plenty of places where half the time, it's just getting there that I enjoy, less so the actual destination. Is my experience somehow not genuine or less fulfilling than someone else's?

Guess what... people like to use the Internet and share their experiences. It harms no one. Frankly it works as great advertising for the national parks.

A lot of people who are into hiking are also not keen on sharing and try to play keep away games. 

[Scott5114]

If Yellowstone had no infrastructure there would be no few bills.

Bullshit. You still need to pay for the park rangers that keep the lands protected. (And they need infrastructure to do that job.)

The Bureau of Land Management owns a shit ton of land with minimal infrastructure, most of which isn't open to the public, and their proposed budget this year is $1.7 billion.

[Molandfreak]

Attempting to reach places that are only passable by foot is becoming more popular, not less. It's the reason why the bus from Into the Wild was removed from the Stampede Trail.

[hbelkins]

I honestly don't understand the selfie culture. It's even consumed people my age. They post pictures of themselves all over social media. If I ever post a selfie of myself in the middle of a roundabout saying "I love these things," then it's time to commit me to the asylum.

(Just trying to steer this back on topic, as my dislike of roundabouts seems to be a rather unpopular opinion.)

[Quillz]

I like roundabouts, I think they are a good idea. I do think they are implemented in places that don't really need them, though. I think where they work best is places that had non-standard junctions (CA-154/CA-246 comes to mind). And lo and behold, that's one of the best implementations of a roundabout I can think of.

As for selfies, I rarely take them. Sometimes if it's something that's a personal accomplishment of mine (like when I made it to the top of Lassen Peak some years ago), I'll take one. If it's just me in some random spot, not really seeing the point there. But if people want to post them online, whatever, not an issue for me.

[Max Rockatansky]

I spent a great many years not taking pictures of road and hiking stuff.  I had a digital camera in the early 2000s but thought "who the hell would want to see road and hiking photos?"  My Dad was big on Polaroid photos of roads, I should have known he was onto something since it would become popular in the modern era.

[Molandfreak]

I have a neutral opinion about roundabouts. A well-placed one can be really nice and better than a four-way stop, but I don't like the mini ones that replaced traffic lights in city centers, because the street system simply wasn't designed for them. They're also used as a cost cutting crutch a lot of the time where something else is really needed.

[Quillz]

I have a neutral opinion about roundabouts. A well-placed one can be really nice and better than a four-way stop, but I don't like the mini ones that replaced traffic lights in city centers, because the street system simply wasn't designed for them. They're also used as a cost cutting crutch a lot of the time where something else is really needed.

I'm pretty much the same, that's what I meant with my earlier post. The smaller ones are more unofficial stop signs than anything else. The ones in more rural places that replaced junctions that met at angles, those are great. I was in Alaska recently and they've done a good job of implementing them, I think. Quite a few in the Anchorage area, some others out near Fairbanks/North Pole. In California, there is one that is part of the I-80/CA-89 in Truckee. You can go straight onto CA-89, another functions as the on-ramp to I-80. A similar setup is done in the Arcata area, just past the CA-299 junction. All of these are well done.

[CrystalWalrein]

I actually like roundabouts. However, New Jersey-style traffic circles that don't require giving way to traffic in the circle are the bane of my existence.

I also like Clearview, but only on guide signage. Using it on warning or regulatory signage appears garish. It's a pretty font, but it's no Frutiger or Transport.

Perhaps the one thing that might get me burnt at the stake is that I dislike North Carolina's push to label nearly every freeway as an Interstate. I-42 should be a 3-digit spur of I-40 at best, and I-87 serves no purpose as I don't expect it to be built over the marshes to Virginia Beach. I-73 and I-74 are best off as US highways; I have no qualms about a freeway between the Tobacco Corridor and Wilmington being US 220. I suspect that this Interstate push is a long-winded attempt to secure more federal funding.

[sprjus4]

and I-87 serves no purpose as I don't expect it to be built over the marshes to Virginia Beach.

Wut

[algorerhythms]

Of course I-87 serves a purpose. How else are you supposed to drive from New York to Montreal?

[Quillz]

I also like Clearview, but only on guide signage. Using it on warning or regulatory signage appears garish. It's a pretty font, but it's no Frutiger or Transport.

See, I like Clearview fully. The issue I had with it early on wasn't the font in of itself, but it was being thrown onto signs that didn't cater to its specs, or you'd have some elements in Highway Gothic, and others in Clearview. Once newer signs started to be fully Clearview and make some adjustments to account for the spacing differences and what not, Clearview looks just fine.

Alaska in particular seems to do a really good job. I was there a couple months ago and it seems that almost all the signs on the Kenai Peninsula are in Clearview now, and they looked really good. Not information overload, no mixture of different fonts, just Clearview. I see it very rarely here in California. And then other sites are still doing the hybrid approach which looks awful.

Should be noted the reason you might not like it on signs other than guide signs is because the latter was really its main purpose. It's still only officially approved for guide signs. There is a variant known as B which is intended for negative contrast (i.e. black legend on light backgrounds) which has slightly thicker characters. However this is pretty rare and I don't think it looks as good. (Even though in practice the difference is very minor).

[Molandfreak]

Related to the discussion in the Iowa Notes thread, any time a full free-flowing interchange is planned in a city, the DOT should wait until it's fully-funded to do anything there. No nickel-and-dimeing around for multiple years since multiple construction projects just piss people off.

[beau99]

(Just trying to steer this back on topic, as my dislike of roundabouts seems to be a rather unpopular opinion.)

I don't like them either.

One was tested out here in Phoenix just north of where I am, at the intersection of I-17 and one of our surface streets. It proved very unpopular and was removed after only a few years.

But then they decided to put them *everywhere* on AZ-260 between Cottonwood and I-17 in Camp Verde, as well as throughout AZ-179 between I-17 and Sedona. Going through all of them the last time I went to Sedona was so annoying. They accomplish absolutely nothing except cause backups in traffic.

[kphoger]

They accomplish absolutely nothing except cause backups in traffic.

Hyperbole much?

[VTGoose]

(This could go either way, I guess)

Driving is a lost art.

Too many vehicle operators (like appliance operators, they really can't be called "drivers") are self-absorbed, operate not much further than then end of the hood of their vehicle, and don't pay attention to what's going on around them. Drive ahead to anticipate stopped traffic, a light change, someone changing lanes -- doesn't happen. However, micro-passing is a thing, as is suddenly speeding up while someone is actively passing them. If not micro-passing, then hanging out in the left lane in a driver's blind spot (or in a position that blocks a driver from moving left if they need to pass or avoid a hazard). Add in to this group the DIGs (Damn! I'm Good!) who believe the left lane is their's alone and no one should get in their way as they grossly exceed the speed limit and tailgate to intimidate others to get out of their way -- even if a driver is actively passing a line of traffic and has traffic in front of them.

[kphoger]

[rant]

...

[/rant]

Actually, I don't think anything in there is an unpopular opinion.

[Dirt Roads]

Too many vehicle operators (like appliance operators, they really can't be called "drivers") are self-absorbed...

[CtrlAltDel]

Too many vehicle operators (like appliance operators, they really can't be called "drivers") are self-absorbed, operate not much further than then end of the hood of their vehicle, and don't pay attention to what's going on around them.

Well, to be fair, if they're vehicle operators, and not drivers, you don't have much reason to expect all that much from them. 

[Molandfreak]

If I were to travel from Chicago to Kansas City, I would probably take the CKC most of the way unironically. It seems like a lot more fun to drive than the major Interstates in that area.

[kphoger]

Driving without a seat belt shouldn't be against the law for anyone over the age of majority, because it's a personal choice by the individual that poses almost no risk of harm to anyone else.

If anything, instead, maybe cars should be designed to go into "limp mode" if the driver's seat belt isn't fastened.

(I wear my seat belt.)