If someone uses my blog and posts a comment intended to convey a particular message.and asks me to publish it.
I do as he/she hopes I will.
I analyze the comment. I find I cannot accept what is written. I say so.
I explain To the writer and the readers why I cannot accept the account of the event recounted in the comment.
Am I calling him a liar. Or am I simply saying I am not persuaded that happened as you.
told it.
I feel no obligation to a pass on to my readers a story I do not believe myself.
Am I calling a faceless individual a liar. Or am I simply exercising my right in stating my disbelief.
Furthermore the story is perfectly pointless.
No councillor has argued the forty year old pre-fabricated building designed by the manufacturer to meet the town's needs is adequate or in sufficiently good repair.
So why does anonymous wish to deflect attention from the real controversy.; design over-build, location of site, cost of remediating site,late-timing of decision and other pertinent. factors.
If a supporter cares to address these questions and justify the late decision I would certainly be glad to publish that argument.
There's room here for a difference in judgement.
Including why they felt obliged to fill the Council vacancy in time to marshal another vote for their side.
And set up an elaborate process encouraging eighteen residents to accept. an invitation to
compete when no competition was ever intended.
I sit in the ring itself.
I see all the tricks and dodges and repeat strategies. I have the blog to give the play by play.
Social media is something to which today's politicians have yet to become accustomed.
I do believe it is here to stay
Saturday 30 August 2014
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
6 comments:
The "real controversy" points are all a matter of opinion. That's your perspective - see, what you state is open to analysis, just like the 'rain bucket' commenter.
It was an extremely expensive way to deal with a recognized need to improve the existing situation.
I doubt if you are going to receive any comment dealing with the cost or timing. I think there was a need to do something, produce something, as this term draws to a close. If you think about it, running might be a bit awkward if you had just ongoing tussles with trees, towers, a couple of beer, heritage ideas, fab lab ideas, university bids.....etc ... etc.
I liked the ' rain bucket ' story & believe it to be accurate for something that happened quite a few years ago. It would be my guess that the serious leaking described was rectified during that period. It could not have continued as I know from my own experience. The lack of a washroom facility for women is something else entirely.
@16:21
You're forgetting the playground equipment & the salt removal system that the staff guy said would not actually " remove salt ".
I am back-tracking a bit here. There was an open letter in the Auroran to the town about the demand for an all-year tennis facility. Do you, as a councillor, get to see the reply ? And do we, as those who read the letter, get to see it too?
Or is that micro-managing ?
Post a Comment