San Francisco park-naming contest goes hilariously wrong
Nearly 4,300 entries were submitted to San Francisco Recreation and Parks' 'Great Park Naming Contest' after two miles of the Great Highway was permanently closed to create it, KRON4 reported.
With the park project receiving 54 percent support in a public vote, many have used the naming contest to vent their frustration.
Opponents say the park rangers have overstepped the authority of the state and should not decide how roads are used. They also say the plans do not address environmental concerns.
Meanwhile, supporters say traffic will be moved on to under-utilized roads in the neighborhood, with space freed up for leisure.
District 4 supervisor Joel Engardio played a major role in the 'Proposition K' public park, which will officially open on 12 April.
'Many of them have told me they didn't feel heard in their objection to it being on the ballot,' Engardio said. 'I take this feedback to heart because it's important to me that everyone is heard.'
Now the citizens' frustration has spread to the list of names submitted.
Here's a few of some of the submissions:
Park name
Reason for proposed name
Parky McParkface
'In the great culture and history of the Internet, this is the only appropriate name.'
This Is Stupid, Let's Not Do It
'I have to find another way to commute to work. So let's not close this road. Like my justification SF?'
Really Stupid Park
'It's a road!!!!'
No One Who Lives Here Voted for This Park
'It seems like only people who live nowhere near the great highway want this to be a park and everyone who uses it or lives near it wants a road.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hill
a day ago
- The Hill
The left is trying to use international ‘lawfare' to shut down Musk and X
Elon Musk had three recent posts on X that are worth noting if you are opposed to censorship and cancellation. The first was two cartoon panels with the question, 'How do you tell who's telling the Truth?' The next panel offered the answer: 'The ones trying to silence other people are the ones lying.' Just prior to that, Musk had reposted a post that reads, 'President Trump's State Department has announced it is coming to the defense of Elon Musk's X after France labeled it an organized crime group and opened a criminal investigation. The State Department's DLR [the Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor] stated, 'As part of a criminal investigation, an activist French prosecutor is requesting information on X's proprietary algorithm and has classified X as an 'organized crime group.' Democratic governments should allow all voices to be heard, not silence speech they dislike. The United States will defend the free speech of all Americans against acts of foreign censorship.'' And just prior to that, Musk reposted a post from the conservative activist Mark Kern: 'There is a full on attack on the Internet by the UK and EU, disguised as 'for the children.' The ID requirement is affecting even Discord users and X users. It is full on dystopian as they ramp up police to arrest people for speech.' Below that is a link to a Telegraph article with the headline 'Elite Police Squad to Monitor Anti-Migrant Posts on Social Media.' Multiple people I have spoken with in the U.S., the U.K. and the EU believe that Musk and his X platform represent the greatest single threat to the far left and its goal of pushing its narratives unchallenged across the globe. One way the left now seems intent on stopping Musk and X is by mimicking the various 'lawfare' schemes rolled out against then-candidate Donald Trump prior to the 2024 election, which many Trump supporters saw as an unethical attempt to force him out of the race. While that 'lawfare' tactic failed — thanks in large part to Trump taking it head-on, day after day, while exposing it for what it was — activists in Europe and elsewhere believe the strategy can be refined and hardened for use against Musk and X in an attempt to intimidate, censor or silence them. Lest we forget, back in 2023, the European Union opened a probe into X for alleged 'failure to counter illegal content and disinformation.' Ah. The catch-all accusation frequently used by the intelligentsia on the left: 'disinformation.' Recall the draconian COVID-19 dictates from the left enacted to combat 'disinformation'? Here is a January headline from ABC News: 'EU politicians warn against Elon Musk's incursions into European politics.' Of course, Musk might rightfully retort that his 'disinformation' and 'incursions' were not only protected free speech, but simply ways to point out severe double-standards and harmful policies that were having an adverse effect upon the majority of the citizens of those nations. I wrote a piece for this site a year ago titled ' Could Elon Musk actually be arrested and X cancelled?' I highlighted calls for Musk to be arrested for stating his opinions while anticipating that the personal animus directed against him, X and the internet by certain individuals and groups in Europe advocating for censorship and cancellation could grow. It now seems that I was correct. All of which raises an obvious question:Why do so many on the left want to prevent people around the world from gathering as much information as possible on their own, then coming to their own conclusions based on their own research? Do they fear people thinking for themselves? Do they fear their own constituents, customers and neighbors? Open minds open doors. I have always believed it imperative to listen to those I may disagree with. What if I am wrong and they are correct? What if they show me a truth I refused to believe out of ignorance, intolerance or indoctrination? Aren't I the one getting a gift — one I could not receive if their voices were censored or canceled? Alarmingly, many on the left in Europe — as well as in the U.S. — don't seem to share my belief that we need to listen to those we disagree with. Note this April headline from The New York Times: 'E.U. Prepares Major Penalties Against Elon Musk's X.' The opening paragraph of the article spells it out: 'European Union regulators are preparing major penalties against Elon Musk's social media platform, X, for breaking a landmark law to combat illicit content and disinformation, said four people with knowledge of the plans.' Once again, the left rolls out 'illicit content and disinformation' against Musk, X and the internet. Of course, millions around the world who are against censorship and cancellation and strongly in favor of free speech might say this is a transparent attempt by some on the left to intimidate and censor a site and voices that expose their continual failures to billions of people around the world. One person's 'disinformation' is another's 'irrefutable truth.' Don't hide behind censorship. Let the people think for themselves.
San Francisco Chronicle
2 days ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
Sunset District group plans its own night market after bigger event canceled
Less than a month after organizers announced that the popular Sunset District summer night market would not return for its third year, a group of local businesses and community organizations have begun planning a smaller, one-night event with hopes of attracting a portion of the thousands of people who attended the neighborhood's past celebrations. The Sunset After Dark event will occupy three blocks on Irving Street on Sept. 26, offering a 'celebration of food, culture, small business and the incredible people who make the Sunset special,' said Rob Aiavao, a spokesperson for the event's organizing team, in a statement to the Chronicle. Applications for both food and non-food vendors are currently open. Organized by local advocacy group Dear Community and Sunset restaurant Smokin D's BBQ, the event was 'born out of a desire to bring neighbors together and support the local economy,' Aiavao said, adding that neighborhood residents, merchants and school partners are involved. While visitors may see familiar food vendors and activities at Sunset After Dark, the event is separate from the city-funded Sunset District Night Market, which has drawn thousands each year since its launch in 2023. Many expected the market to return to the neighborhood this summer, but event organizer Sunset Night Market Collaborative announced the celebration would not be back for its third year earlier this month. It is scheduled to return in 2026. The cancellation came amid political tension in the neighborhood, as some merchants in the area who back the recall of Supervisor Joel Engardio reportedly said they no longer support the night market. Engardio has been a vocal supporter of the night market, but he is facing a tough battle for his political position after championing Proposition K, which proposed to close part of the Upper Great Highway to cars to create a park. City-wide voters passed the measure by 54%, but local residents on the west side were furious over the two-mile closure. The massive growth of the night market and its varied impact on local businesses have raised questions about the future of the event, said Angie Petitt, co-founder of Sunset Mercantile — a member of the Sunset Night Market Collaborative. While some restaurants and vendors near Irving Street flourished, others — like dry-cleaners and salons — saw significantly less business in the daytime, Petitt said. On top of crowd management and ensuring there was enough food and activities for attendees, a lot of questions were left unanswered after last year's night markets exploded in popularity. In the meantime, Petitt said she is glad to see that businesses and local organizations are collaborating on the Sunset After Dark event, and hopes to support them in the planning process. 'While the Sunset Night Market is currently on pause, Sunset After Dark provides a fresh opportunity for the community to reimagine what a shared public celebration can be,' Aiavao said. 'We're working to ensure that it's truly rooted in local voices, organized by and for the neighborhood.' Engardio said Friday that 'politics have no role in a night market.' For him, the fact that businesses and local organizations have proactively led plans for a smaller night market demonstrates that the event was always intended to support the community. 'The residents and the merchants of the Sunset love night markets,' he said. 'I look forward to doing whatever I can to support the night market.'
UPI
2 days ago
- UPI
Musk's X: Britain's Internet safety law 'seriously infringes' free speech
"Many are now concerned that a plan ostensibly intended to keep children safe is at risk of seriously infringing on the public's right to free expression," the Global Government Affairs wing of the Elon Musk-owned X said Friday on Britain's newly-enacted Online Safety Act. Photo by Ismael Mohamad/ UPI | License Photo Aug. 1 (UPI) -- The Elon Musk-owned social media platform X said Friday that Britain's newly-enacted Online Safety Act "seriously" is on the cusp of violating free speech masked as the fight to protect kids from explicit online content. "Many are now concerned that a plan ostensibly intended to keep children safe is at risk of seriously infringing on the public's right to free expression," the Global Government affairs wing of the Bastrop, Texas-headquartered X said Friday. Britain's Online Safety Act created a new set of legal duties that tech companies must abide by. It mandated they evaluate the potential of users encountering illegal Internet content and children being exposed to online harm, which included a required safety assessment. "When lawmakers approved these measures, they made a conscientious decision to increase censorship in the name of 'online safety,'" the letter stated. The British parliament passed it in September 2023 in the quest to improve online safety for young people. X argues the British people may not of been aware of the "trade-off" when London passed the bill. The OSA covers more than 130 offenses ranging from harassment and "assisting or encouraging suicide" to terrorism, fraud and "unlawful immigration." It targets tech entities that spans "social media or video-sharing platforms, messaging, gaming and dating apps, forums and file-sharing sites." According to the former Twitter, the act's "laudable intentions" were at risk of "being overshadowed by the breadth of its regulatory reach." "While everyone agrees protecting children is a critical responsibility, it is also clear that an overly rigorous statutory framework layered with a 'voluntary' code and heightened police monitoring, oversteps the intended mission," it continued. On Friday, a British watchdog group indicated that those fears may may be valid. "The BBC is now reporting that information about the wars in Ukraine and Gaza, UK rape gangs, and more is being censored online due to the government's new Online 'Safety' Act," Silkie Carlo, director of Britain-based Big Brother Watch, posted on X. "Well done lads," she added in jest. X's government affairs offiec says free speech will suffer without a "more balanced, collaborative approach." Pornhub and other major pornographic websites had a targeted end of July date to implement its age verification mechanisms in order to comply. Musk, 54, has characterized himself as a "free speech absolutist." The former White House DOGE adviser, for his part, has said the act's purpose was "suppression of the people" as he tweeted a petition calling for it's repeal that got more than 450,000 signatures. OSA's deadline required pornographic websites to implement "robust" age verification methods or face fines close to $20 million or equal to 10% of company proceeds. X cited British regulator Ofcom how it "to date" had allegedly taken a "heavy-handed approach" to enforcement, which it said included a boost in resources, additional "layers of bureaucratic oversight and signaling an aggressive approach to ensuring compliance." In a recent Ofcom research study, some 8% of children aged of 8 to 14 accessed a pornography source over a 28-day period. It included 19% boys and 11% of girls from 13 to 14 years old. In addition to the increased government regulations, X officials also cite Britain's new "National Internet Intelligence Investigations" team unit company officials say "sets off alarm bells" and will further "intensify scrutiny." The social media company said the Internet teams "sole" focus is to monitor social media for "signs of unrest, such as anti-immigrant sentiment, to prevent real-world violence." "While positioned as a safety measure, it clearly goes far beyond that intent," the post reads. "This move has set off alarm bells for free speech advocates who characterize it as excessive and potentially restrictive."
