Yes we do
this post was submitted on 06 Oct 2023
882 points (99.9% liked)
196
17312 readers
656 users here now
Be sure to follow the rule before you head out.
Rule: You must post before you leave.
Other rules
Behavior rules:
- No bigotry (transphobia, racism, etc…)
- No genocide denial
- No support for authoritarian behaviour (incl. Tankies)
- No namecalling
- Accounts from lemmygrad.ml, threads.net, or hexbear.net are held to higher standards
- Other things seen as cleary bad
Posting rules:
- No AI generated content (DALL-E etc…)
- No advertisements
- No gore / violence
- Mutual aid posts require verification from the mods first
NSFW: NSFW content is permitted but it must be tagged and have content warnings. Anything that doesn't adhere to this will be removed. Content warnings should be added like: [penis], [explicit description of sex]. Non-sexualized breasts of any gender are not considered inappropriate and therefore do not need to be blurred/tagged.
If you have any questions, feel free to contact us on our matrix channel or email.
Other 196's:
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Walkable city means taking a bike. Got it.
correct
Largely, yes. Bicycles are a better, healthier way to move distances longer than 100-ish meters, ideally are only powered by human effort and move at speeds low enough that accidents are absurdly unlikely.
Wouldn't that make it a bikeable city?
I live in Europe, not about to break out the bike to go less than a couple of km
That too, but a walkable city by necessity also becomes a bikeable city.
I thought it was just funny that the term "walkable" for some people invokes the idea of using bikes