If this is somehow avoided, then the interiors of the shared vehicles will literally be smeared with shit.
The system would work like this: If a car arrives and a user finds it’s smeared with shit, they report it, it goes into the depot for a check. Since the record tells us how long they were with the car, we know it wasn’t them who applied the shit[1]. We infer that it was the person before them. We get a license to decrypt their name and address. We fine them. I don’t know why you would think this was unsolvable.
[1]: it’s possible a person could, in the two seconds after opening the door of a clean car, throw in a bucket of shit, close the door, then report the damage. People don’t generally do that.
Hmm. It occurs to me that this behaviour looks a lot like someone using the cars as a garbage can, which some assholes might legitimately want to do. Someone would have to be a sociopath to realize that they could do this and get away with it. It would be rare. If they’re using it for regular trash disposal, that could probably be proven in court. Look at them, look at the person they’re accusing. You can probably figure out which one is the motherfucker pretty easily in most cases. The incentive to do this isn’t there.
Since the record tells us how long they were with the car, we know it wasn’t them who applied the shit
Right. That’s why I only said the shit-smearing would happen if the record-making werer somehow avoided. Assuming you can actually keep track of who’s using it, you can deter vandalism most of the time.
You might have trouble with out-of-towners or people with nothing to lose, though. And let’s not make it too simple; it’s a BIG DEAL to ban somebody from the only available form of transportation… that’s something you wouldn’t want to see done without due process.
The system would work like this: If a car arrives and a user finds it’s smeared with shit, they report it, it goes into the depot for a check. Since the record tells us how long they were with the car, we know it wasn’t them who applied the shit[1]. We infer that it was the person before them. We get a license to decrypt their name and address. We fine them. I don’t know why you would think this was unsolvable.
[1]: it’s possible a person could, in the two seconds after opening the door of a clean car, throw in a bucket of shit, close the door, then report the damage. People don’t generally do that.
Hmm. It occurs to me that this behaviour looks a lot like someone using the cars as a garbage can, which some assholes might legitimately want to do. Someone would have to be a sociopath to realize that they could do this and get away with it. It would be rare. If they’re using it for regular trash disposal, that could probably be proven in court. Look at them, look at the person they’re accusing. You can probably figure out which one is the motherfucker pretty easily in most cases. The incentive to do this isn’t there.
Right. That’s why I only said the shit-smearing would happen if the record-making werer somehow avoided. Assuming you can actually keep track of who’s using it, you can deter vandalism most of the time.
You might have trouble with out-of-towners or people with nothing to lose, though. And let’s not make it too simple; it’s a BIG DEAL to ban somebody from the only available form of transportation… that’s something you wouldn’t want to see done without due process.
I said you just fine them for damages. Why would you call for a ban?