this post was submitted on 28 Jul 2025
326 points (98.8% liked)

Mildly Infuriating

45568 readers
11 users here now

Home to all things "Mildly Infuriating" Not infuriating, not enraging. Mildly Infuriating. All posts should reflect that. Please post actually infuriating posts to !actually_infuriating@lemmy.world

I want my day mildly ruined, not completely ruined. Please remember to refrain from reposting old content. If you post a post from reddit it is good practice to include a link and credit the OP. I'm not about stealing content!

It's just good to get something in this website for casual viewing whilst refreshing original content is added overtime.


Rules:

1. Be Respectful


Refrain from using harmful language pertaining to a protected characteristic: e.g. race, gender, sexuality, disability or religion.

Refrain from being argumentative when responding or commenting to posts/replies. Personal attacks are not welcome here.

...


2. No Illegal Content


Content that violates the law. Any post/comment found to be in breach of common law will be removed and given to the authorities if required.

That means: -No promoting violence/threats against any individuals

-No CSA content or Revenge Porn

-No sharing private/personal information (Doxxing)

...


3. No Spam


Posting the same post, no matter the intent is against the rules.

-If you have posted content, please refrain from re-posting said content within this community.

-Do not spam posts with intent to harass, annoy, bully, advertise, scam or harm this community.

-No posting Scams/Advertisements/Phishing Links/IP Grabbers

-No Bots, Bots will be banned from the community.

...


4. No Porn/ExplicitContent


-Do not post explicit content. Lemmy.World is not the instance for NSFW content.

-Do not post Gore or Shock Content.

...


5. No Enciting Harassment,Brigading, Doxxing or Witch Hunts


-Do not Brigade other Communities

-No calls to action against other communities/users within Lemmy or outside of Lemmy.

-No Witch Hunts against users/communities.

-No content that harasses members within or outside of the community.

...


6. NSFW should be behind NSFW tags.


-Content that is NSFW should be behind NSFW tags.

-Content that might be distressing should be kept behind NSFW tags.

...


7. Content should match the theme of this community.


-Content should be Mildly infuriating. If your post better fits !Actually_Infuriating put it there.

-The Community !actuallyinfuriating has been born so that's where you should post the big stuff.

...


8. Reposting of Reddit content is permitted, try to credit the OC.


-Please consider crediting the OC when reposting content. A name of the user or a link to the original post is sufficient.

...

...


Also check out:

Partnered Communities:

1.Lemmy Review

2.Lemmy Be Wholesome

3.Lemmy Shitpost

4.No Stupid Questions

5.You Should Know

6.Credible Defense


Reach out to LillianVS for inclusion on the sidebar.

All communities included on the sidebar are to be made in compliance with the instance rules.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
all 42 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] spankmonkey@lemmy.world 190 points 8 months ago (3 children)

Someone driving by or walking across might not even know that those crosswalks weren’t painted by the city.

Oh no, people might think they are real and look out for pedestrians!

[–] Ebby@lemmy.ssba.com 48 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

I got a ticket for parking next to a red curb after the resident painted it. Had to go down to the city and get confirmation it was fake to get the ticket dismissed.

Not really angry about that one. Taught me good info about the government back then.

[–] Naich@lemmings.world 16 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Or pedestrians might think they are real and get run over because they aren't up to proper spec for a crossing.

[–] moody@lemmings.world 6 points 8 months ago (2 children)

Besides being painted in reflective road paint, which these ones are, what else would cause a pedestrian to be run over?

As long as it looks like a crosswalk, and drivers can see it, I'm not sure what else you would need.

[–] phdepressed@sh.itjust.works 12 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Depending on location there's additional stuff, mostly signage notifying drivers. With great variation in requirements depending on the road.

[–] GaMEChld@lemmy.world 5 points 8 months ago

Signage is definitely important. You can't just throw shit down on the pavement and have it be treated as a sign itself.

[–] Sneptaur@pawb.social 60 points 8 months ago (1 children)

This happens all the time in cities. The good cities take it as prompting to perform a traffic study and determine whether a crosswalk would be safe there, then implement one if possible. This happens in Seattle sometimes.

[–] ch00f@lemmy.world 27 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

Drivers are required to stop for pedestrians when crossing the street at marked crosswalks and at intersections as well. That’s right it’s perfectly legal to cross the street at an intersection even without the aid of crosswalk striping on the pavement.

https://sdotblog.seattle.gov/2014/09/12/crosswalk-law-1-0/

Not like anybody stops for pedestrians, but they're supposed to at least.

You might be talking about the case in Seattle where some people argued that the pride flag crosswalks in Capitol Hill weren't up to code.

[–] Sneptaur@pawb.social 14 points 8 months ago (2 children)
[–] ch00f@lemmy.world 4 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Oh. I live in Seattle too. Wasn't aware of that story.

[–] Sneptaur@pawb.social 4 points 8 months ago (1 children)

The Capitol Hill Seattle blog is a good one to subscribe to, lots of good local coverage

[–] ch00f@lemmy.world 3 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I'm more of a West Seattle blog person. :)

[–] Sneptaur@pawb.social 1 points 8 months ago

Just remember to read the Stranger, Seattle's only newspaper,

[–] 01189998819991197253 52 points 8 months ago (1 children)

the city is sending crews to remove them.

The city seems to be overreacting. It's just a crosswalk, there's no reason to remove the families who painted them. Sheesh

[–] Witchfire@lemmy.world 13 points 8 months ago

Straight to El Salvador /s :(

[–] Baguette@lemmy.blahaj.zone 47 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Oh hey I used to live near Sawtelle. Honestly the city department there is fucking terrible.

I parked there once using street parking when I was first looking for apartments and I got ticketed for being in a no parking zone when there wasn't a sign or a red line saying no parking.

Went to the city's office and despite photo evidence we still got denied an appeal.

[–] NikkiDimes@lemmy.world 4 points 8 months ago

Huh. Sounds like an easy way for the city to generate revenue.

[–] Gork@sopuli.xyz 24 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I think he might have had better success if he painted the crosswalks to the same specifications as the ones the city uses.

If it blends in with all the other crosswalks, nobody will likely notice, at least until it gets repaved and the lack of documentation would be written off as some sort of administrative error.

[–] grue@lemmy.world 13 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

Anybody know where an individual (as opposed to a road construction company) can source the correct type of road-marking paint and/or thermoplastic?

Asking for a friend.

[–] fuckwit_mcbumcrumble@lemmy.dbzer0.com 11 points 8 months ago (5 children)

Does painting a crosswalk really increase safety? I feel like the type of person not pay attention and run someone over is the type of person to not care if there's a crosswalk, not pay attention, and run someone over.

[–] ozymandias117@lemmy.world 19 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I don't understand why you would expect it not to increase safety.

It gives a visual cue to drivers that it is more likely someone is intending to cross at this location.

Any time I see an intersection I assume there might be people. Downtown where I’m at there’s rarely crosswalks at intersections unless it’s a major through road.

[–] surewhynotlem@lemmy.world 9 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Yeah. Our brains are conditioned to assume people are more likely to be in a crosswalk. It's also why I drive slowly past long rows of parked cars. I've been conditioned to assume a kid is going to jump out.

[–] Proprietary_Blend@lemmy.world 2 points 8 months ago

Most folks are not conditioned to be thoughtful.

[–] KazuyaDarklight@lemmy.world 8 points 8 months ago

It's probably incremental but, IMO, a crosswalk does imply a certain amount of pedestrian traffic that might encourage a smidge of extra attention and double checking from some drivers, vs a location that gives the appearance of having very infrequent pedestrian crossingsmay be far less frequent. That not to say that complacency is any kind of excuse. But it is how people are on average.

[–] LilB0kChoy@piefed.social 7 points 8 months ago

On a large scale I have no idea but it does for me when I’m driving.

A crosswalk at an intersection, especially an unmetered one, serves as a warning that there’s enough regular pedestrian traffic or a risk that dictated it was needed.

Helps me, personally, to be extra aware for crossers.

[–] Kissaki@feddit.org 4 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (2 children)

Checking Wikipedia; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pedestrian_crossing#Safety

The safety of unsignalled pedestrian or zebra crossings is somewhat contested in traffic engineering circles.

Research undertaken in New Zealand showed that a zebra crossing without other safety features on average increases pedestrian crashes by 28% compared to a location without crossings. However, if combined with (placed on top of) a speed table, zebra crossings were found to reduce pedestrian crashes by 80%.

A five-year U.S. study of 1,000 marked crosswalks and 1,000 unmarked comparison sites found that on most roads, the difference in safety performance of marked and unmarked crossings is not statistically significant, unless additional safety features are used. […] This study only included locations where vehicle traffic was not controlled by a signal or stop sign.

Traffic accidents are reduced when intersections are daylighted, i.e. visibility increased such as by removing adjacent parked cars.

Research undertaken in New Zealand showed that a zebra crossing without other safety features on average increases pedestrian crashes by 28% compared to a location without crossings.

See, that's mostly what I was thinking. "Zebra stripes" make pedestrians feel safe to cross, and have virtually no impact on drivers who can easily just ignore them. But paired with other things they are a good addition, especially since it tells pedestrians where to cross.

[–] squaresinger@lemmy.world 1 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I'd like to see the methodology. A zebra crossing also increases foot traffic compared to a location without crossings.

[–] Kissaki@feddit.org 1 points 8 months ago

The quoted Wikipedia article has some source references which I chose not to include for conciseness/readability.

[–] ThePantser@sh.itjust.works 6 points 8 months ago

Isn't the government "we the people"? So you know the government DID paint them. Fuck those guys, they just mad because the contractor that paid them off didn't get their cut and now they are.

If the "government" can't be bothered to do the job they were elected to do the people will have to step in.

[–] Catoblepas@piefed.blahaj.zone 4 points 8 months ago (1 children)

But the city said they never received a request for crosswalks in that area

Assuming this is truthful, at least submit the request first. Maybe save yourself a little work.

[–] explodicle@sh.itjust.works 2 points 8 months ago

And specifically in this case, Angelenos can download the MyLA 3-1-1 app to make requests easily. I do it all the time.

[–] postmateDumbass@lemmy.world 2 points 8 months ago

Hard to paint them over if the cars driving thru the area dont stop or swerve to avoid the crew in them.