I was struck by this when I first saw it. Cool use of distortion effects and all that, laudable goal of getting people to slow down near schools, too. The post points out the "sweet spot" and mentions some of the unintended consequences. I get it.
But then, these two sentences jumped out at me:
The $15,000 decal was paid for by Preventable.ca ...Didn't they have a better use for $15,000 dollars that a stunt that lasted a week? And why $15,000? The local screen printer could have banged that out for a couple hundred at most. The anti-danger people can spend the money like water.
the decal was removed after one week. It was an experiment, a stunt,