this post was submitted on 12 May 2026
92 points (96.9% liked)

news

963 readers
910 users here now

A lightweight news hub to help decentralize the fediverse load: mirror and discuss headlines here so the giant instance communities aren’t a single choke-point.

Rules:

  1. Recent news articles only (past 30 days)
  2. Title must match the headline or neutrally describe the content
  3. Avoid duplicates & spam (search before posting; batch minor updates).
  4. Be civil; no hate or personal attacks.
  5. No link shorteners
  6. No entire article in the post body

founded 8 months ago
MODERATORS
top 10 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] floofloof@lemmy.ca 21 points 5 days ago

said she had to make a choice between accepting federal funding or removing a rainbow crosswalk

I think the caption editor got that a bit backwards.

[–] bitjunkie@lemmy.world 14 points 5 days ago

Hahaha oh no guys, primary colors! What are these ultra-manly sigma conservative pussies going to be terrified of next?

[–] otacon239@lemmy.world 4 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago) (2 children)

I saw this previously for another crosswalk and it turns out these crosswalks actually do violate DoT standards, which is why we keep seeing them get moved. I don’t actually think these removals are illegitimate. It may have originally gotten attention drawn for the wrong reasons, but I don’t think it should get an exception to safety guidelines just because I’m personally for the cause it represents.

[–] Hacksaw@lemmy.ca 3 points 5 days ago

I work in transportation regulation and there is no evidence that rainbow crosswalks are less safe than white ones. Although they don't comply with the regulation as written they clearly meet an equivalent level of safety and there are regulatory procedures that would permit an exemption to the word of the regulation on that basis.

[–] MedicPigBabySaver@lemmy.world 2 points 5 days ago (1 children)

It's literally more visible. Not a detriment to safety.

[–] otacon239@lemmy.world 2 points 5 days ago (1 children)

From the last time this was brought up:

https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/bicycle_pedestrian/resources/crosswalk_marking_selection_guide.pdf, Page 22. It’s not one of the official crosswalk selection options. Page 23 talks more about how decorative options fit into it and how it should be low contrast.

It’s less about it being visible and more about a consistent and recognizable stopping point.

[–] MedicPigBabySaver@lemmy.world 1 points 5 days ago (1 children)

If a driver can't recognize a crosswalk, no matter the color palette, they shouldn't have a license.

[–] Kolanaki@pawb.social 3 points 5 days ago (1 children)

We have crosswalks in my city that are just musical notes in an arrangement that is completely unrecognizable as a crosswalk. If you didn't live here, I doubt you'd know they're supposed to be crosswalks.

[–] MedicPigBabySaver@lemmy.world 1 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Are they in intersections? At end of a walkway? Drivers should recognize them.

[–] Kolanaki@pawb.social 1 points 5 days ago

A few of them are just in the middle of a one way street with no intersection or pedestrian crossing lights. Like the one between the police station and city hall.

The downtown area of this city is a huge clusterfuck of nonsense.