Originally Posted by
bragi
I don't think that's quite fair. It's pretty clear that no one in the industrialized world is actually car-free in the sense that they never set foot in a vehicle with an internal combustion engine. In a very strict sense, none of us are car-free; among other things, the goods that we all depend on are mostly delivered by truck. However, it's also pretty clear that most people who actually own motor vehicles drive them on a daily basis, while those who do not own them nearly always make do with other forms of transport. If you're trying to design a simple car-free/not car-free rubric, car ownership seems an obvious place to start.
I don't have a problem with this assessment. It is a bit like Pee weeT-ball baseball. There are no outs and everyone gets to bat. And by that definition car light people are car free. So car light becomes redundant. It was first explained to me in my phycology class. If a person can't achieve their goal lower the expectations.
For myself I didn't cut back on driving or work to lower my carbon foot print so I could define myself to anyone else and I have never needed to "award" of being called car free or car light.
But pointless or not the forum is defined when you look at it while looking at the different forums. Unless it is ever redefined trying is only getting close and that only counts in horseshoes and hand grenades.
I like Roody's example of AA. The recovering AA menbers never say they are not Alcoholics they say how long they have been without alcohol. What we practice most often here is denial and that discredits the people that are truely car free as far as using one themselves no matter who might own the car.
Just my opinion however.