The plaza was just installed about 2 years ago so there was no preceding chance for anyone to be here because “here” didn’t exist. Nudity in the neighborhood was common prior to the plaza being constructed, but a couple of people hanging out for hours was a new thing that we hadn’t seen before after the plaza was installed.

I consider the trouble began when Wiener pioneered the sit-on-a-towel rule? Which brought a bunch of other naturists to the place?
The plaza was installed in what still is the street, and opened right after the present manager was elected, (the plaza was in the works for years before he arrived yet). Formerly, nude people would walk the area and typically simply congregate at a place called “Hibernia Beach”. This is a street corner where a big bank building is, (now known as Bank of America), and one of the few spots in the locality where the sun beams through the shadows brought on by the other buildings. “Hibernia playa” was thus named in the 1970’s after the bank that occupied the building back then. It is been known as a spot to see scantily clad and bare people for decades.
I hadn’t believed the towel rule was a terrible thing for the nudists?
(who usually sit on a towel regardless, though I suppose I can not attest to the Castro naturists’ towel manners), but what do you think was the true intention behind it? Was it actually to enact a law to get nudists to constantly sit on a towel, or did he have some other plan?
The towel laws was an attempt by the manager to get media attention and it worked. Everyone I know already sat on towels as common established nudist courtesy. The outside furniture here in SF is just not well kept, frequently dirty and would not be safe to put your bare behind on.
Were any of the exhibitionists ever arrested for lewd behaviour? If not, would you believe they should’ve been? (I’ve come across very little as far as descriptions of the “bad behavior” in the Castro – whether it was regular, illegal, etc)
The SFPD has no records of arrests for lewd conduct during the past two years since the plaza was opened.
Would you believe the exhibitionists are the reason Wiener suggested the nudity prohibition? If so, how should he have handled it? Or is he just anti-nudity?
Wiener introduced the prohibition to increase his media exposure and pump up his name recognition numbers. I met with him in his office at his invitation before the introduction of the legislation, and he wasn’t interested in any community based alternatives. The assembly was really a fishing expedition so he could determine how well organized the nudist activists are and what type of opposition we’d present to the legislation. There were only ever two men I saw in the plaza that I ‘d have described as exhibitionists. The conduct I detected was not lewd if you ask me, but didn’t match up to my comprehension of appropriate non-sexual urban nudist behavior either. If you will pardon my candidness, standing nude on the corner and making your penis twirl like an airplane propeller is just not great naturist conduct in my own opinion, although this conduct didn’t disturb me personally.
Do lots of the Castro nudists wear cock rings? What exactly is your view on wearing cock rings in public settings for decoration (not sexual) functions?
Personally, I don’t wear a cock ring. Only a few guys do in my observation. I believed it was likely to be a problem and I was not in favor of it at first. Afterward I took an opinion poll within my online Yahoo group and I saw that of respondents considered cock rings akin to bracelets and necklaces. After that, I was sufficiently convinced a cock ring could be no different than any other body jewelry and wearing one is not lewd.
Would you work with the Naturist Action Committee, and are they assisting with the suit?
No and no.
If the lawsuit doesn’t succeed, how do you believe the ban will change naturism / naturism?
Since much of the nation, and the world, look to San Francisco as a leader in societal change, the prohibition, if passed and implemented, could have a chilling effect on both toleration and urban naturism well beyond the bounds of our city.
Would you think nudists should just go nude in clubs, beaches and other “designated places”? If not, why?

Sequestering folks away behind walls or other boundaries indicates is black or otherwise unacceptable. Body shame is a learned behavior which can be exacerbated when nudists hide in resorts or other places.
My bottom line is that I believe the human body is a lovely thing in all its many forms. I do not believe we need to hide behind garments in public or anywhere else. Body freedom and recognition is not about being bare just at resorts, beaches or clubs.
Some say folks should not go about taking advantage of legal public nudity and go unclothed in urban areas because the city regularly ends up overturning that law and/or creating a new law to prohibit that liberty. Just how can naturists prevent this from occurring?