And what's you argument? That people wouldn't be upset that outsiders are lobbying their town?

I never said anything about outsiders forcing anything. They simply lobby and people get mad about it, those lobbyists are "YIYBY". Its the origin of a term.

You built a strawman about forcing a town to do something, and are really intent on attacking that strawman. But you built it, I never said anything to that effect. Of course they cannot force the town to do anything and of course the lobbyiest have first amendment rights. Never said anything to the contrary.

EDIT: Our convo is now rate limited, but I'm glad you live in a place where politicians work for voters and ignore lobbyists. Treasure it, most are not that lucky.

How is it YIYBY if they can’t force the town to sell the land? They can lobby until they are blue in the face, but they can’t really accomplish anything.

You are the one who said the town owns the land. If they own the land, it looks like the voters are safe—nothing should happen.

You are the one who built the strawman by inventing a public forest under threat from lobbyists. I was just showing that this strawman was an illusion.

I believe that NIMBYs often try to do a motte and bailey argument where they make it seem like someone is literally going to force property owners to build something, when in reality they are trying to prevent property owners from using their property as they want. That really gets my goat, because it’s dishonest.