Anonymoose has left a new comment on your post "Another Opinion":
"I don't understand. the Mayor is not a stupid man."
Indeed he is not. So perhaps you should instead be asking yourself if your information sources are as reliable and fair as you'd like.
You can't believe everything you read on the Internet you know. That goes doubly so if the issue has anything to do with this town.
************************
If I don't write a post first thing, I very often don't write one for that day.
This morning, I had a number of other things to write .When I finished, it seemed like this might be a day I wouldn't post.
Then the above comment came through. It made me smile. It amuses me to guess the author. Who, among all the people I know, would be most likely to offer that opinion.
It recommends, without subtlety, don't be believing everything or anything you read on this blog or in this town.
Which begs the question. If you believe nothing you read in this town, why are you reading it?
The second point is; there's a far greater chance of what you read being true, if the author takes responsibility for accuracy by providing his or her name.
Chances are increased if the person is elected. A councillor has access to facts.Or to be more precise. A Councillor is entitled to have all facts related to town business.
Number three;. a Councillor could believe in the responsibility to communicate the facts to whoever, within the community is interested in knowing.
Number four; facts can be verified.
Number five; a record for integrity may well be the most important qualification a couucillor brings to the table.
Number six;common sense mitigates absolutely against the risk of being proven to have misled people or distorted facts when people depend on said councillor to provide information that helps formulate an opinion.
I bless the advent of the internet.
In all history, there has never been a better opportunity to be informed and participate in the democratic process.
It was never thus.
***************
Three more comments came in response to this post. Al abusive. None worth the space to print them. So don't be holding your breath Anonymoose.
But it must be so difficult to get up every
ReplyDeletemorning to find no one to phone and order around,
no one to threaten, and no one to listen to your
words of wisdom. Life's a bitch when the power
slips away and leaves a residue of anger.
There’s a couple of points of differing opinion which you may (or may not) agree on:
ReplyDeleteWhen you state: “The second point is; there's a far greater chance of what you read being true, if the author takes responsibility for accuracy by providing his or her name.”
In my opinion when an author provides his or her name, they take responsibility for what they are stating. They are willing to stand by what they believe to be the truth, but that doesn’t directly apply that the information is accurate or true.
In response to: “Chances are increased if the person is elected. A councillor has access to facts. Or to be more precise. A Councillor is entitled to have all facts related to town business.”
Yes, you would think that chances are increased and perhaps they should very well be. But it may still depend on how the facts are interpreted, whether it is to their advantage or not to present them or perhaps they are simply ignored or the resources that are available just are not used.
In regards to: “Number five; a record for integrity may well be the most important qualification a councillor brings to the table.”
If I could add – This may well be one of the most important qualifications that all of us bring to the table in our dealings with everyone in our lives.
So in ending (with tongue in cheek) just because I include my name below doesn’t mean the above is accurate.
Are legal opinions included in the material we
ReplyDeleteshould not believe ?
To Ponder, not To Post
ReplyDeleteA hitherto arrogant lawyer used the word 'please'
in an email this week. Signifying ? Nothing ?