"Also, unlike what some commenters think, this doesn't really go against democracy. "
It definitely goes against democracy and civility.
Maybe it's for the better, maybe it's for the worse - but a small group of people taking it upon themselves to decide for everyone else how a city should operate is a very tricky place for any society to be.
Maybe most people don't want something.
Maybe it makes rescue workers jobs difficult by blocking traffic in a certain hot spot.
Maybe the situation is more complex than one would imagine (i.e. some lanes radically affect the flow of traffic, screw up incoming/outgoing traffic/lane changes).
I can think of quite a few things that 'civic vigilantes' could do that would be way, way out of bounds.
It would be nice if SF could elect a mayor that could improve efficiency as opposed to simply encouraging people to make up their own policies.
It definitely goes against democracy and civility.
Maybe it's for the better, maybe it's for the worse - but a small group of people taking it upon themselves to decide for everyone else how a city should operate is a very tricky place for any society to be.
Maybe most people don't want something.
Maybe it makes rescue workers jobs difficult by blocking traffic in a certain hot spot.
Maybe the situation is more complex than one would imagine (i.e. some lanes radically affect the flow of traffic, screw up incoming/outgoing traffic/lane changes).
I can think of quite a few things that 'civic vigilantes' could do that would be way, way out of bounds.
It would be nice if SF could elect a mayor that could improve efficiency as opposed to simply encouraging people to make up their own policies.