Old City Custom Concrete LIED To Me

[sharkey]

Your slippery-slope argument is sitting on a big fat slippery slope. This argument could be used to justify any punishment for any infraction.

These bandit signs are a ****ing irritating nuisance, and as we've seen, not even the people who put them up can publicly defend the practice. But, Jesus. Get a hold of yourself! Think about the ramifications for a second of a business losing its license: that means not just the douchey owner who wanted to put the sign up loses his job, but all his employees too. Except he's probably got other sources of income while they (and their kids) don't. The blood's on the business's hands, you say? Someone else would have agreed: Draco (lawgiver) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I'm glad I don't live in a city where bare utility poles (and all the high-fives you all give each other) are considered worth that kind of punishment. Next time you go over the speed limit or step out front with a beer in your hand, you should be glad we don't live in that kind of city, either.

I don't expect that a business would lose its license to operate for putting up one illegal sign, and I don't think that is what Arctic intends either. Yesterday, I called a spammer to complain about his numerous illegal signs in my neighborhood. He was honest. He said he did not care about the law and was going to continue with his campaign. What would you do with a business like that? Should he keep his license when he openly admits he will not follow the law of the city that grants that license? Before you go and start with the violin music about the poor businesses that may be going through a slow time or their employees, I ask you: what about the competitors to that business that obey the law and do not degrade our neighborhoods? Aren't they going throught the same difficult economic times? Don't they have employees? Should Olde City Concrete get customers as a result of illegal bandit signs that might otherwise go to their competitors who limit themselves to legitimate advertising methods?

[sharkey]

No answer to that one?

[sharkey]

Your slippery-slope argument is sitting on a big fat slippery slope. This argument could be used to justify any punishment for any infraction.

These bandit signs are a ****ing irritating nuisance, and as we've seen, not even the people who put them up can publicly defend the practice. But, Jesus. Get a hold of yourself! Think about the ramifications for a second of a business losing its license: that means not just the douchey owner who wanted to put the sign up loses his job, but all his employees too. Except he's probably got other sources of income while they (and their kids) don't. The blood's on the business's hands, you say? Someone else would have agreed: Draco (lawgiver) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I'm glad I don't live in a city where bare utility poles (and all the high-fives you all give each other) are considered worth that kind of punishment. Next time you go over the speed limit or step out front with a beer in your hand, you should be glad we don't live in that kind of city, either.

What happens when you continually break the speed limit and get caught?? After a given number of infractions you...... LOSE YOUR LICENSE! Have you ever seen just one bandit sign? These guys order them in bundles of a hundred and up.

[loveisnoise]

Sharkey, come on! What exactly do you mean by this, then?

I wonder if there is a way that they could lose their Phila. Business License as a contractor for violating 10-1202?

[sharkey]

Sharkey, come on! What exactly do you mean by this, then?

10-1202 is the section of the Phila. Code that prohibits signs on public poles. What I mean is that violating this should lead to suspension or loss of a business license, just as many other infractions can lead to loss of that license. I did not write, and neither did arctic, that a business should lose its license for a single infraction. However, if a business is going to flagrantly and consistently violate the law that governs how to do business in this city, then yes, it should lose its license. Not to do so is unfair not only to the people that live in the neighborhodds that they degrade, but as I wrote above, also to the competing businesses that play by the rules.

[sharkey]

If you read Arctic's whole post, he called this offender some time ago about the bandit signs, and she promised to not to put more up. She then went and started a new bandit campaign. This is another strategy that I've learned some spammers use---act contrite and assume you won't notice when they do the same thing again.

[loveisnoise]

You've obviously never been in a business war.

Years ago, flyers were the 'bandit signs'. Nightclubs and businesses would throw flyers onto yuppie blocks so that L&I would go ape on their competitors! The same thing would occur here. Been there and saw that crap show man.

10-1202 is the section of the Phila. Code that prohibits signs on public poles. What I mean is that violating this should lead to suspension or loss of a business license, just as many other infractions can lead to loss of that license. I did not write, and neither did arctic, that a business should lose its license for a single infraction. However, if a business is going to flagrantly and consistently violate the law that governs how to do business in this city, then yes, it should lose its license. Not to do so is unfair not only to the people that live in the neighborhodds that they degrade, but as I wrote above, also to the competing businesses that play by the rules.

[sharkey]

[QUOTE=loveisnoise;489874]I'm on my phone right now but I'll provide Picts and links tomorrow. I fought like crazy and now the stuff is mostly gone- but I always went straight to the ad agency rather than the individual.

Were they spray painting the ads on the walls with permission of the owners? I can't imagine the fed. gov't. or even an ad agency running a grafitti campaign.

[sharkey]

You've obviously never been in a business war.

Years ago, flyers were the 'bandit signs'. Nightclubs and businesses would throw flyers onto yuppie blocks so that L&I would go ape on their competitors! The same thing would occur here. Been there and saw that crap show man.

Any infraction of any part of the code in Phila. give the recipient some sort of hearing to plead their case (due process of law--thank God and the Constitution for it.) Are you really saying that we should not enforce our laws because any infraction might really be the result of a business competitor "framing" the poor innocent accused?

[loveisnoise]

Undertheinfluence.org I'll try to find Picts for you man
[QUOTE=sharkey;489882]

I'm on my phone right now but I'll provide Picts and links tomorrow. I fought like crazy and now the stuff is mostly gone- but I always went straight to the ad agency rather than the individual.

Were they spray painting the ads on the walls with permission of the owners? I can't imagine the fed. gov't. or even an ad agency running a grafitti campaign.

[loveisnoise]

Any infraction of any part of the code in Phila. give the recipient some sort of hearing to plead their case (due process of law--thank God and the Constitution for it.) Are you really saying that we should not enforce our laws because any infraction might really be the result of a business competitor "framing" the poor innocent accused?

From previous bragging on this and other forums, I can think of taxes that AS and others may have not paid. Should we start a full assault without knowing the whole story?

[lemko]

I don't expect that a business would lose its license to operate for putting up one illegal sign, and I don't think that is what Arctic intends either. Yesterday, I called a spammer to complain about his numerous illegal signs in my neighborhood. He was honest. He said he did not care about the law and was going to continue with his campaign. What would you do with a business like that? Should he keep his license when he openly admits he will not follow the law of the city that grants that license? Before you go and start with the violin music about the poor businesses that may be going through a slow time or their employees, I ask you: what about the competitors to that business that obey the law and do not degrade our neighborhoods? Aren't they going throught the same difficult economic times? Don't they have employees? Should Olde City Concrete get customers as a result of illegal bandit signs that might otherwise go to their competitors who limit themselves to legitimate advertising methods?

Well said, sharkey! If a business cannot even advertise legally, who knows how shady the rest of their business is? Most bandit sign posters are scammers. Victims of these scammers have little recourse as it is difficult to later find these scammers. I doubt they have insurance or even a legitimate license. If I take down a handful of signs and they disappear, I wouldn't bother the business owner. It is the scumbag who plasters hundreds, if not thousands, (ahem..Trexler) on every surface creating an eyesore with whom I have issues!

[Gladys]

No answer to that one?

have you never heard of gorilla marketing?

We still don't know the circumstance and even if we did, still over the top.

[Gladys]

From previous bragging on this and other forums, I can think of taxes that AS and others may have not paid. Should we start a full assault without knowing the whole story?

exactly

[OffenseTaken]

Hey, look: I applaud the work you're doing, mostly. I would even contribute, if I ever saw these things in my neighborhood. I just wish you wouldn't lose all sense of proportion to the crime itself. If you hate ugly **** in this town, I wish that kind of zeal were saved for fighting worse things.

I don't expect that a business would lose its license to operate for putting up one illegal sign, and I don't think that is what Arctic intends either. Yesterday, I called a spammer to complain about his numerous illegal signs in my neighborhood. He was honest. He said he did not care about the law and was going to continue with his campaign. What would you do with a business like that? Should he keep his license when he openly admits he will not follow the law of the city that grants that license? Before you go and start with the violin music about the poor businesses that may be going through a slow time or their employees, I ask you: what about the competitors to that business that obey the law and do not degrade our neighborhoods? Aren't they going throught the same difficult economic times? Don't they have employees? Should Olde City Concrete get customers as a result of illegal bandit signs that might otherwise go to their competitors who limit themselves to legitimate advertising methods?

[OffenseTaken]

You think I'm going to sit on this thread all night and hit command-R until you write a response?

No answer to that one?

[ArcticSplash]

Hey, look: I applaud the work you're doing, mostly. I would even contribute, if I ever saw these things in my neighborhood. I just wish you wouldn't lose all sense of proportion to the crime itself. If you hate ugly **** in this town, I wish that kind of zeal were saved for fighting worse things.

Ahh the "murder rate argument", common on Philly.com

"Why bother with __insert event, effort, program or idea here___" because people are killing each other in this city.



It's an old, tired, and defunct argument.

[ArcticSplash]

I'll put this plain and simple:

This company decides that street littering is an acceptable form of advertising, clearly illegal and the City Code which makes it illegal has already been reviewed by the Federal appellate circuit for both First Amendment and free and fair elections; both efforts to strike down the ban on these signs failed. Therefore, enforcement stands. I've yet to see a beautification group in Philadelphia endorse the signs.

And lastly, this company acknowledged in August that the signs were not permissible after I informed them they weren't OK to put up; they agreed to not put up any new ones. I was very polite about it.

But then they decided to make a new sign and start putting it up. So they asked for this. Am I "attacking" them? Well of course I am; that's the whole point. I want them to stop putting the signs up. If they stop putting them up, I will stop attacking them.


Until then, I don't see any reason why I should stop criticize them for knowingly trashing our communities with this litter. Olde City Custom Concrete in my opinion isn't worth doing business with if they continue to do this. And if they are so quick to break their word, why would I... for instance, trust them on an estimate, or that they'll stand behind their work? I'd go with a different contractor who doesn't throw Coroplast up everywhere in hopes someone naive enough to respond to a bandit ad, does.

[sharkey]

From previous bragging on this and other forums, I can think of taxes that AS and others may have not paid. Should we start a full assault without knowing the whole story?

What is "the whole story?" Arctic gave the background re Olde City Concrete. He contacted them some time ago and they promised not to put up any more signs. They are putting up more signs. They are pleading "I'm just trying to support myself." Yeah, well so is a bar owner that stays open past 2 am or serves underage patrons. So is a contractor who short dumps rather than paying for proper waste disposal. Are we supposed to consider their tales of woe before we hold them accountable for their antisocial behavior?

[ArcticSplash]

This is the stupid crap she tried to pull right at the outset:




No, bandit signs don't feed your family. Concrete feeds your family. Businesses can thrive and survive without using bandit signs. This is the 21st century. Be more creative--especially since you have a FKN SOCIAL MEDIA ACCOUNT.