[sdhgaiojfsa]

I can kinda understand why he wasn't happy. Your initial phrasing was very hostile. I am not sure what he would have said if you had phrased your question more neutrally, but your tone definitely gave him the opportunity to partially ignore your (totally valid!) concerns.

[dbnoch]

In this situation, it is not OPs job to satisfy the mayor. It is this mayor's job to be a representative of the people so IMO the Mayor should have been able to handle hostility and criticism.

The mayors opportunity to partially ignore concerns shows their incompetence towards the issue.

UPDATE I wanted to mention that I totally agree with what you had said. I do not want to blame OP for being concerned and potentially angry

[sdhgaiojfsa]

What you say is undoubtedly true. In a better world, we'd have a better mayor. That ideal mayor could always give the optimal public-serving answer no matter how they are approached. If the mayor were in the habit of listening to my advice, I'd surely tell him the same. His answer was suboptimal.

But for the purposes of this conversation, the only control surface I have is my speech, and the only mayor there is is the one on the other end of the line. So, depending on what kind of result I want, I must modulate my tone.

[cortesoft]

Right, his job is not to 'satisfy the mayor', but his job is to try to accomplish his goal. The poster is saying you are more likely to accomplish your actual goal if you don't start by being antagonistic, which is certainly true.

[justin66]

Am I the only one who felt like if you filtered out the douchiness of the question and the touchiness of the mayor's answer, it was a worthwhile exchange? Question asked, question answered, and the answer was substantive enough that one could go on and answer follow-up questions (although they'd have to be in writing since the radio format apparently does not allow for that).

[enraged_camel]

Tone of delivery is as important as the message itself. You need to treat people with respect if you want the same from them.

[Bellspringsteen]

What was the hostile part? The "Dont tell me its a state problem?" I mean the man punts everything to the state, I had to preempt

[sdhgaiojfsa]

But it didn't work, right? He turned your attempt at preemption into a distraction from your point.

I don't know how best to handle these things, but what I might have said is something like, "<Why it's important that bus and bike lanes not be blocked.> <What you invented, the results.> <Would the city consider investing in an invention like mine, or else what are we going to do to reduce the rate at which these blockages occur?>"

FTR, I'm totally in favor of the automatic enforcement you describe! I'd also like to mostly or entirely remove free parking from the city.

[Bellspringsteen]

Yeah, good point. Maybe I should have tried to be less accusatory.

[dopamean]

Being any amount of accusatory is counterproductive when you want someone to honestly answer a question in any context.

[nemild]

From Abraham Lincoln in 1842, speaking about his preferred approach:

It is an old and a true maxim, that a "drop of honey catches more flies than a gallon of gall." So with men. If you would win a man to your cause, first convince him that you are his sincere friend. Therein is a drop of honey that catches his heart, which, say what he will, is the great highroad to his reason, and which, when once gained, you will find but little trouble in convincing his judgment of the justice of your cause, if indeed that cause really be a just one. On the contrary, assume to dictate to his judgment, or to command his action, or to mark him as one to be shunned and despised, and he will retreat within himself, close all the avenues to his head and his heart; and though your cause be naked truth itself, transformed to the heaviest lance, harder than steel, and sharper than steel can be made, and though you throw it with more than Herculean force and precision, you shall be no more be able to pierce him, than to penetrate the hard shell of a tortoise with a rye straw.

http://www.abrahamlincolnonline.org/lincoln/speeches/tempera...

[kolpa]

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4562214/

> A common expression would have us believe that ‘you can catch more flies with honey than with vinegar’. But this is not true in the case of the fruit fly Drosophila melanogaster (xkcd, 2007).

Yes, NIH cited XKCD https://xkcd.com/357/

[hitekker]

That you can take criticism and admit to some fault in a public forum already puts your rhetoric above those of most commenters-- myself included.

I hope you can effect the political change you seek.

[sdhgaiojfsa]

I make the similar mistakes all the time in my personal and professional life. It's an easy one to do.

[dahart]

How happy were you with his answer? It seemed fairly reasonable, he pushed back a bit and matched your tone I think, but overall sounded like he's very much on your side to me regarding the larger problem. I feel like he deflected a little by emphasizing accidents over blockages, without acknowledging much that blockages push bikes into dangerous situations. But I'd probably agree that prioritizing safety over annoyances is reasonable.

[briandear]

If we remove free parking from the city does that apply to bikes as well?

[Klinky]

Damned if you do, damned if you don't. If the goal was to imply to the audience listening that the mayor likes to pass people's issues onto the state instead of addressing them, then that goal was accomplished successfully. Not bringing it up would have simply resulted in the mayor passing the buck without the audience being aware of that context.

Calling a politician on a radio call in show is typically very unlikely to result in any actual action, on any issue, regardless of tact taken. Making the audience aware of the problem, and your distaste for the mayor's proposed solutions ,may be more useful to one's goals.

I also don't think pimping your product on a radio call in show is very tactful either.

[unclesaamm]

It's absolutely warranted and you did great. Everyone else on Hacker News is commenting as if perfect communication would have solved this issue. What they don't understand is the political reality of the situation - that in no universe of conversations, would Bill DeBlasio have admitted on recording that he was wrong or whatever.

In my experience, when politicians act defensively and cornered, they often go and make changes behind the scenes later. When you let them go without a scuffle they will view you as a non-threat. So great job, and cool project!

[aidenn0]

The "NYPD is unwilling and unable to enforce" part was the hostile part. That comes of as "traffic cops aren't doing their job" when I think you meant "without 100x more traffic cops we can't even make a dent in this"

[markcerqueira]

Yeah, he certainly could've been more pragmatic because I'm sure ultimately he wants to see the problem solved, not figure out who to blame.