They're back to trash Prospect Park Again? MIH Ventures

the park alliance group should require MIH to post a bond guaranteeing they will clean up, during and after the affair.

it's that simple.

Why should MIH be banned from the park, Armchair?

Why should MIH post a bond, Hamilton?

This park regularly looks a mess on Mondays, especially after holiday weekends and based on what I saw during my Monday run it was no where near on the scale of last year in terms of trash. MIH made an effort to clean up, but it's quite silly to hold them responsible for people who think it's appropriate to show up for a picnic at 6pm with grills in tow on a SUNDAY. At this point MIH had long stopped serving food and playing music. All of their equipment was packed up and off the park grounds. At 6pm most folks should be picking up trash and packing up to LEAVE the park.

Also, park employees made considerable effort to empty the nearby trash cans more frequently than normal, which was great.

jeffrey wrote: That is definitely a possibility worth considering, but one must also consider that it may be a combination of the two (some bad apples coming from outside as well as inside the event).

It's an open event. Not in any way private. All were invited, and invited to pass it along by word of mouth. Such is the intent and nature of PR for big, open, free events like this. One can't just say the whole group is one homogenous group of well-mannered professionals even though there may have been a huge contingent of those.

Honestly, the group was pretty homogenous up until roughly 6pm. Folks with jobs, families, and the like were leaving around that time. If you were there from early afternoon until about 5pm you would have seen a change in the type of people showing up. I really don't care what anyone says. You can generally spot riff raff by paying attention to demeanor, style of dress, and language. Around 6pm it was definitely "time to pack up and leave" if you had any sense.

I totally agree that those promoting the event could have went about things differently.

Isthar

this is a no brainer, bonds are posted to make sure the park is left in the same condition it was before the event.

is that a problem.?

Hamilton wrote: Isthar

this is a no brainer, bonds are posted to make sure the park is left in the same condition it was before the event.

is that a problem.?

Yes, it is a problem if the group is not permitted to close off an entire section of the park and deny access to anyone they don't want attending their event. This also does little to prevent people from setting up nearby and doing what they want.

If you people don't want this or similar groups in the park you should organize yourselves and figure out a way to make sure they are denied permits and enlist your locally elected officials to prevent people from gathering in groups over a certain number (maybe 100 or so?) unless it is an event sponsored by an organization affiliated with the city.

Ishtar wrote: [quote=Hamilton]Isthar

this is a no brainer, bonds are posted to make sure the park is left in the same condition it was before the event.

is that a problem.?

Yes, it is a problem if the group is not permitted to close off an entire section of the park and deny access to anyone they don't want attending their event. This also does little to prevent people from setting up nearby and doing what they want.

.

if you can't control it, don't do it.

that's enough of a reason to require a bond.

I agree with ham on this.

.

glad you got my back

Hamilton wrote:

if you can't control it, don't do it.

that's enough of a reason to require a bond.

Does this also apply to city sponsored events? They certainly can't control people and their garbage after the events they hold. Celebrate Brooklyn two weeks ago is a is a prime example.

.


i'm talking about any event.

another prime example is P. DIddys out of control concert where 9 people were crushed to death.

as far as the celebrate brooklyn problem, it seems the alliance group underestimate the potential attendance and security was understaffed and not able to handle the unruly crowd.

hopefully they'll be in control at the next event, if not they should pull the plug on any upcoming events till they can implement a plan that will protect the public at future shows..

Ishtar wrote: [quote=Hamilton]

if you can't control it, don't do it.

that's enough of a reason to require a bond.

Does this also apply to city sponsored events? They certainly can't control people and their garbage after the events they hold. Celebrate Brooklyn two weeks ago is a is a prime example.

Did the Brooklyn Philharmonic crowd leave a mess? Was anyone shot at that event?

,


just the usual caviar droppings and fine wine bottles, the philharmonic crowd is more likely to subject you to litigation then shoot you.

eggcream wrote: [quote=Ishtar][quote=Hamilton]

if you can't control it, don't do it.

that's enough of a reason to require a bond.

Does this also apply to city sponsored events? They certainly can't control people and their garbage after the events they hold. Celebrate Brooklyn two weeks ago is a is a prime example.

Did the Brooklyn Philharmonic crowd leave a mess? Was anyone shot at that event?

Yes there was a mess after the Philharmonic. The park was not pristine the next morning.

Also, no one was shot AT the MIH event. Get your facts straight.

Hamilton wrote: .


i'm talking about any event.

Then I totally agree with you.

So long as they keep this event on the black side of the park, who really cares?

Right?

Drunken Revival wrote: So long as they keep this event on the black side of the park, who really cares?

Right?

You know, as far as sarcasm goes, I'm really not sure which side of the race-baiting game that is meant to cover.

So I guess I'll just file it as both rhetorical sarcasm and a deliberate troll, not worth a response in either case.

jeffrey wrote:

So I guess I'll just file it as both rhetorical sarcasm and a deliberate troll, not worth a response in either case.

Could have fooled me... considering I'm reading your f'ing, self proclaimed, worthless response....

Anyway, it was a misspelling... I meant "back" side of the park...

DR, for years you've been among the most warned users on this site for exactly this sort of behavior.

Your initial username was Drunken Guest, which the Mods voted to permanently ban for this very reason.

The only additional thing I have to add here is as follows:

Goodbye.