|
Post by warriorpride on Aug 27, 2008 9:37:06 GMT -5
"But if someone gets elected that people on blue board don't "approve of", they will be criticized for blinking at the wrong time. You know it and I know it so let's not pretend that it won't happen. There's plenty of freedom of expression here, too and I rather enjoy the way it's done here. We, too, don't tell people how to think or what to feel. But with a much more welcoming and engaging community." And if the 'more welcoming' community gets wind of an NFUD (endearing term I guess) community member in the mix- or even put on the board - it would not emulate exactly what you are criticizing about blue ? Let's not pretend that wouldn't happen either - since we're all being honest. There are some on both boards that will be critical of people from certain groups regardless - each for what they feel are valid reasons. Other than one CFO comment, I don't see anyone here making any criticisms. And in fact, that comment wasn't necessarily a criticism, just a statement of that person's affiliation that I will find useful in April if that candidate decides to run. Useful, but not judgmental, in my case. I don't speak for others here. Perhaps they feel more strongly than I do. But since I've only been here 3 years, and don't know some history behind some candidates, it is helpful to know for the future and I will cast my votes accordingly. As I've stated before, it does us no good right now as we don't get to choose. I really don't know why this is even being played out on these forums as it doesn't matter what OUR opinion is. Come April, it will and I'm sure it will be more vindictive then - for both side, yes. Again, I speak for myself, but I'm choosing to see for myself and to watch and listen to the appointee first before making judgments. I do have some opinions on some candidates, but I'm waiting to see how they perform if chosen. It seems there are some that are quick to criticize and not listen to/watch their performance at all. Their minds are made up. Perhaps you don't agree and see it much differently. I can't or won't try to convince you otherwise. I see a difference in the way these "conversations" on the two boards are being played out. Perhaps you don't. We'll have to agree to disagree. Well, I'm not losing losing any sleep over this, nor will I analyze each and every name that's in the hopper. I trust that the SB will pick someone that appears to be best qualified. I just hope that the application had "did you support CFO?" and "did you support nFUD" checkboxes
|
|
|
Post by majorianthrax on Aug 27, 2008 9:48:25 GMT -5
EB, If someone feels that way about a particular candidate, are they not allowed to whether you agree with it or not? They spoke for themselves, not for anyone else. The candidate still has every chance to prove themselves to the district even if one person out there doesn't like them for whatever reason. As for your 'blue board' references, I will take them as a compliment because I allow people to express their opinions as openly and honestly as they see fit. In my opinion, that's the whole point of a board in the first place; to not tell people what they need to think or how they need to act but instead to allow them the freedom of expression of their opinions and feelings regardless of what they might be. I don't think you are getting what everyone is saying Arch. I agree totally with what you say about expressing feelings opinions, views etc. That is not what anyone would question. I just think it interesting everyone on the Blue Board would automaticly consider her a puppet just because she doesn't share some of their views. Its like, "If you agree with us you are a great candidate. If you don't you are a puppet to MM".
|
|
|
Post by Arch on Aug 27, 2008 9:57:16 GMT -5
EB, If someone feels that way about a particular candidate, are they not allowed to whether you agree with it or not? They spoke for themselves, not for anyone else. The candidate still has every chance to prove themselves to the district even if one person out there doesn't like them for whatever reason. As for your 'blue board' references, I will take them as a compliment because I allow people to express their opinions as openly and honestly as they see fit. In my opinion, that's the whole point of a board in the first place; to not tell people what they need to think or how they need to act but instead to allow them the freedom of expression of their opinions and feelings regardless of what they might be. I don't think you are getting what everyone is saying Arch. I agree totally with what you say about expressing feelings opinions, views etc. That is not what anyone would question. I just think it interesting everyone on the Blue Board would automaticly consider her a puppet just because she doesn't share some of their views. Its like, "If you agree with us you are a great candidate. If you don't you are a puppet to MM". You are generalizing about 'everyone on blue'. Again, let's be honest... How many dissenting votes or even dissenting discussions have been brought up about important topics at SB meetings by the last people appointed? I've looked over the votes and minutes and none stand out. If you know of some, please put them forward. A lot of the comments concede the fact that it's the SB's right to appoint and as such, they will and have in the past 'appointed' people who have most lined up with the board's agenda and have not been 'boat rockers'. They have the luxury through an appointment to pick like-minded people and historically, have. As such, people are formulating guesses and opinions about this time around; some people's opinions being stronger than others. The extreme definition of that is a 'puppet' but some have expressed their own opinion that not every candidate on the list would fall into that category; so I take issue specifically with your 'everyone on blue' statement.
|
|
|
Post by warriorpride on Aug 27, 2008 10:17:20 GMT -5
I don't think you are getting what everyone is saying Arch. I agree totally with what you say about expressing feelings opinions, views etc. That is not what anyone would question. I just think it interesting everyone on the Blue Board would automaticly consider her a puppet just because she doesn't share some of their views. Its like, "If you agree with us you are a great candidate. If you don't you are a puppet to MM". You are generalizing about 'everyone on blue'. Again, let's be honest... How many dissenting votes or even dissenting discussions have been brought up about important topics at SB meetings by the last people appointed? I've looked over the votes and minutes and none stand out. If you know of some, please put them forward. A lot of the comments concede the fact that it's the SB's right to appoint and as such, they will and have in the past 'appointed' people who have most lined up with the board's agenda and have not been 'boat rockers'. They have the luxury through an appointment to pick like-minded people and historically, have. As such, people are formulating guesses and opinions about this time around; some people's opinions being stronger than others. The extreme definition of that is a 'puppet' but some have expressed their own opinion that not every candidate on the list would fall into that category; so I take issue specifically with your 'everyone on blue' statement. OK folks, let's stay on the SB vacancy topic, please. Not really interested in debating the merits, or lack thereof, of other discussion forums and/or members on those forums.
|
|
we4
Junior
Let's Go Yankees......Let's Go Yankees
Posts: 204
|
Post by we4 on Aug 27, 2008 10:21:00 GMT -5
In the grand scheme of things, how much weight do these two message boards hold. I mean really. Who cares of a candidate is scrutinized or held in the most favorable light. If you look at the number of people on these boards (362 on blue and 91 on green) and many of those on green are also on blue and there a few posters with more than one id, really how much of the school district is represented here. For me, it's fun reading what people have to say. It makes me think, it makes me angry and it makes me laugh. If anyone really thinks these boards will make or break and election, you need to get off the computer and get out and talk to people. For the person who does get appointed, it will name recognition that gets them re-elected and doing something stupid and crazy to get them not.
|
|
|
Post by Arch on Aug 27, 2008 10:22:05 GMT -5
You are generalizing about 'everyone on blue'. Again, let's be honest... How many dissenting votes or even dissenting discussions have been brought up about important topics at SB meetings by the last people appointed? I've looked over the votes and minutes and none stand out. If you know of some, please put them forward. A lot of the comments concede the fact that it's the SB's right to appoint and as such, they will and have in the past 'appointed' people who have most lined up with the board's agenda and have not been 'boat rockers'. They have the luxury through an appointment to pick like-minded people and historically, have. As such, people are formulating guesses and opinions about this time around; some people's opinions being stronger than others. The extreme definition of that is a 'puppet' but some have expressed their own opinion that not every candidate on the list would fall into that category; so I take issue specifically with your 'everyone on blue' statement. OK folks, let's stay on the SB vacancy topic, please. Not really interested in debating the merits, or lack thereof, of other discussion forums and/or members on those forums. Agreed, it would be nice if they were not brought up in the first place.
|
|
|
Post by concerned on Aug 27, 2008 10:40:18 GMT -5
EB, If someone feels that way about a particular candidate, are they not allowed to whether you agree with it or not? They spoke for themselves, not for anyone else. The candidate still has every chance to prove themselves to the district even if one person out there doesn't like them for whatever reason. As for your 'blue board' references, I will take them as a compliment because I allow people to express their opinions as openly and honestly as they see fit. In my opinion, that's the whole point of a board in the first place; to not tell people what they need to think or how they need to act but instead to allow them the freedom of expression of their opinions and feelings regardless of what they might be. I don't think you are getting what everyone is saying Arch. I agree totally with what you say about expressing feelings opinions, views etc. That is not what anyone would question. I just think it interesting everyone on the Blue Board would automaticly consider her a puppet just because she doesn't share some of their views. Its like, "If you agree with us you are a great candidate. If you don't you are a puppet to MM". I feel I must respond on green, since my comment has been discussed in detail over here. First I am entitled to my opinion. ST has posted on these boards and I have read her opinion column, so I feel I know the candidate. I have knowledge of this candidate and I don't share her views. My comment is not a blanket comment, there is thought behind it. Just because I don't share her views is not why I think she will be a puppet. I felt the same way about AT and did not vote for her and still feel the same way about her. It is my opinion and my vote, not the blue board.
|
|
|
Post by wvhsparent on Aug 27, 2008 10:41:53 GMT -5
EB, If someone feels that way about a particular candidate, are they not allowed to whether you agree with it or not? They spoke for themselves, not for anyone else. The candidate still has every chance to prove themselves to the district even if one person out there doesn't like them for whatever reason. As for your 'blue board' references, I will take them as a compliment because I allow people to express their opinions as openly and honestly as they see fit. In my opinion, that's the whole point of a board in the first place; to not tell people what they need to think or how they need to act but instead to allow them the freedom of expression of their opinions and feelings regardless of what they might be. Arch, People are just as free to express their opinions here, and you know that.
|
|
|
Post by Arch on Aug 27, 2008 10:43:25 GMT -5
There's plenty of freedom of expression here, too and I rather enjoy the way it's done here. We, too, don't tell people how to think or what to feel. But with a much more welcoming and engaging community. Even your comments are welcomed here. But again, that's just my opinion. Unless of course it's one of those 'sore' topics that tend to result in threads being locked or a 'warning' given about the subject even if there's a relationship of that 'topic' to the current thread.... Additionally, there's a 'word filter' list that at various times in the past would alter people's postings with regards to those topic matters and make their postings read with words they never typed. Not just my opinion, but fact.
|
|
|
Post by warriorpride on Aug 27, 2008 10:46:39 GMT -5
There's plenty of freedom of expression here, too and I rather enjoy the way it's done here. We, too, don't tell people how to think or what to feel. But with a much more welcoming and engaging community. Even your comments are welcomed here. But again, that's just my opinion. Unless of course it's one of those 'sore' topics that tend to result in threads being locked or a 'warning' given about the subject even if there's a relationship of that 'topic' to the current thread.... Additionally, there's a 'word filter' list that at various times in the past would alter people's postings with regards to those topic matters and make their postings read with words they never typed. Not just my opinion, but fact. It's also a fact that if you don't like this board, you are free to not post or even read it.
|
|
|
Post by wvhsparent on Aug 27, 2008 10:49:22 GMT -5
I don't think you are getting what everyone is saying Arch. I agree totally with what you say about expressing feelings opinions, views etc. That is not what anyone would question. I just think it interesting everyone on the Blue Board would automaticly consider her a puppet just because she doesn't share some of their views. Its like, "If you agree with us you are a great candidate. If you don't you are a puppet to MM". I feel I must respond on green, since my comment has been discussed in detail over here. First I am entitled to my opinion. ST has posted on these boards and I have read her opinion column, so I feel I know the candidate. I have knowledge of this candidate and I don't share her views. My comment is not a blanket comment, there is thought behind it. Just because I don't share her views is not why I think she will be a puppet. I felt the same way about AT and did not vote for her and still feel the same way about her. It is my opinion and my vote, not the blue board. Thank you for posting your opinion here. Just curious, what views differ?, and why do you think she will be a "puppet" then.
|
|
|
Post by Arch on Aug 27, 2008 10:49:25 GMT -5
Unless of course it's one of those 'sore' topics that tend to result in threads being locked or a 'warning' given about the subject even if there's a relationship of that 'topic' to the current thread.... Additionally, there's a 'word filter' list that at various times in the past would alter people's postings with regards to those topic matters and make their postings read with words they never typed. Not just my opinion, but fact. It's also a fact that if you don't like this board, you are free to not post or even read it. It's also a fact that if you don't like the constructive criticism you can ban me and tell everyone about how much freedom there really is here to discuss anything.
|
|
|
Post by warriorpride on Aug 27, 2008 10:49:35 GMT -5
OK folks, let's stay on the SB vacancy topic, please. Not really interested in debating the merits, or lack thereof, of other discussion forums and/or members on those forums. Agreed, it would be nice if they were not brought up in the first place. It would also be nice if this "green" board was not scrutinized, generalized about, or talked poorly about on your "blue" board. As the admin of the "blue" board, will you make that same statement ( "it would be nice if they were not brought up in the first place") on your "blue" forum?
|
|
|
Post by warriorpride on Aug 27, 2008 10:53:43 GMT -5
It's also a fact that if you don't like this board, you are free to not post or even read it. It's also a fact that if you don't like the constructive criticism you can ban me and tell everyone about how much freedom there really is here to discuss anything. it's one thing to "discuss" something, it's another to b1tch, moan, complain, stir the pot, constantly be negative about almost everything the SB/Admin does, and belabor "opinions" over and over again - the former is welcome here, the latter isn't
|
|
|
Post by Arch on Aug 27, 2008 10:54:11 GMT -5
Agreed, it would be nice if they were not brought up in the first place. It would also be nice if this "green" board was not scrutinized, generalized about, or talked poorly about on your "blue" board. As the admin of the "blue" board, will you make that same statement ( "it would be nice if they were not brought up in the first place") on your "blue" forum? Sorry, but blue is criticized here too. I don't limit what people talk about, nor have I ever banned anyone.
|
|