Hacker News Reader

That's true, but "neighbors have a veto over whether you can do X" is an untenable way to manage those property rights. A bigger city would codify limits on what you can do with waterfowl or whatever. Douglas doesn't even have a city attorney.

View on HN

The charitable take would be that chickens are otherwise forbidden, but having all your neighbors approval grants an exception.

Reading the article I wouldn't assume her city to be in that position, but the system itself can have merits depending on how it's deployed.

Exactly. It's nonsense to have a law that says, "you can do X on your property unless someone, anyone objects". Imagine if other laws all worked that way. Oh, you can drive whatever speed you want, unless someone else on the road with you has a problem with it!

You can, however, drive any speed you want on your own property.

And yet, if you tried it, you might find this often not as true as you might think.

Not if your excessive speed is exacerbating my migraines and disrupting the sleep patterns of my cats.

Also, the dust thrown up by your excessive speed by vehicle is increasing particulate matter in the air, which may contain known carcinogenic compounds.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com