|
Post by eb204 on Jul 26, 2008 10:50:35 GMT -5
I wasn't trying to "pick a fight" with you. I am simply trying to get an understanding on your perspective if indeed, you were opposed to the GAME itself. I clearly understood your desire to have options for continued funding and I too, hope there are options for continued funding. I also don't have a "bone to pick" but I do want answers to some questions I've asked. I'm sure you can relate to that frustration, no? The fact that I and others have not gotten answers have resulted in much speculation. I truly hope that speculation is misguided. My opinions are based on what I do know and some of which I have not shared here for reasons I am uncomfortable with. I am not trying to insinuate anything. But, yes, these are my opinions and I still stand by them based on what I do know. Until I can confirm otherwise, they will remain my opinion. Like you and others Arch, I am very passionate about certain things as well, especiallly when it affects the special needs population. So yes, I am very concerned about this and am stating my opinion(s) here. If you feel that I'm making accusations or flat out falsehoods, point me to where you know differently. Maybe those are the answers I'm looking for. You stated you have no feelings for the game itself one way or the other. I accept that. But can you answer this? What are the down sides of this event? All of the postives have been put forth - I won't repeat those - but what are the negatives of an event like this? Again, just trying to understand what the community thinks. I don't believe I ever said there were 'downsides' to an event the same as I never said I was against it so I'm not really sure why you are asking me that question. To me, it sounds like a Fox News tactic to try to pin a position on me by repeating it often enough even though the whole assumptions are false to begin with. Those 'office politics' games are best not played. As for relating to frustrations due to lack of answers; welcome to my world. Sucks, don't it? I try to make lemonade from the lemons and there's a good tasty batch in the hopper. Throwing out a comment about certain neighborhoods convince a board to change their tune most certainly sounded like an insinuation. Is this 'really' what happened and is this (as you stated) "based on what I do know and some of which I have not shared here for reasons I am uncomfortable with. " Arch, I don't play political games, nor have I ever liked "office politics" either. My question was a sincere one and I was simply trying to get a read on what, if any, downsides there are to this game, either in your opinion or anyone else's, for that matter. Others have questioned this as well here and I'm trying to see the other side of things. You have stated you see none - great - you've answered my question. No political game. I apologize to all, if the "certain neighborhoods" comment was out of line. However, in light of things going on in this district of late, I don't feel it is a stretch to question the motives of anyone in this district at this point. And that is my other concern with cancelling this game. I, and others as they've stated, think this is such a good thing for this district and a great way to bring all communities together for a common good. Perhaps with more events such as this, everyone in this community might forget there are "certain neighborhoods" and we can all be one community again. It's a long shot, I know, but it certainly can't hurt.
|
|
|
Post by specialneedsmom on Jul 26, 2008 10:55:53 GMT -5
I would be disappointed to know that any funds for scholarships would not be available. Your word is concerned, mine is disappointed.
|
|
|
Post by gatormom on Jul 26, 2008 11:05:41 GMT -5
I have been reading this discussion with interest. I am concerned that an opportunity for raising money for scholarships is lost. I do hope that the IPPC board has something up their sleeves to replace those funds. Anyone trying to raise money in today's economic climate understands that funds are very limited in all areas of fundraising.
I do wonder why it was cancelled. Is there a good reason or set of reasons for canceling it? This is hard for me to understand as a non-IPPC person. A fun event that raised a lot of money last year with all the pieces ready to move forward is cancelled. There just has to be a real good reason, right?
|
|
|
Post by Arch on Jul 26, 2008 11:46:29 GMT -5
I don't believe I ever said there were 'downsides' to an event the same as I never said I was against it so I'm not really sure why you are asking me that question. To me, it sounds like a Fox News tactic to try to pin a position on me by repeating it often enough even though the whole assumptions are false to begin with. Those 'office politics' games are best not played. As for relating to frustrations due to lack of answers; welcome to my world. Sucks, don't it? I try to make lemonade from the lemons and there's a good tasty batch in the hopper. Throwing out a comment about certain neighborhoods convince a board to change their tune most certainly sounded like an insinuation. Is this 'really' what happened and is this (as you stated) "based on what I do know and some of which I have not shared here for reasons I am uncomfortable with. " Arch, I don't play political games, nor have I ever liked "office politics" either. My question was a sincere one and I was simply trying to get a read on what, if any, downsides there are to this game, either in your opinion or anyone else's, for that matter. Others have questioned this as well here and I'm trying to see the other side of things. You have stated you see none - great - you've answered my question. No political game. I apologize to all, if the "certain neighborhoods" comment was out of line. However, in light of things going on in this district of late, I don't feel it is a stretch to question the motives of anyone in this district at this point. And that is my other concern with cancelling this game. I, and others as they've stated, think this is such a good thing for this district and a great way to bring all communities together for a common good. Perhaps with more events such as this, everyone in this community might forget there are "certain neighborhoods" and we can all be one community again. It's a long shot, I know, but it certainly can't hurt. This was the political game statement: "You seem very much opposed to this game as well, Arch. I'm curious as to why." You flat out made an accusatory post about my position and did not ask my opinion on the basketball game. Edit: Let me add another line from the paragraph I pulled the first quote from: " Are you opposed to things that might, in fact, bring this community back together? " Wow, another presumption based on the first false strawman argument you posted about me supposedly being 'opposed' to the game. These sorts of things are part of the politics game. You know it and I know it and I suggest you knock it off.
|
|
|
Post by gatormom on Jul 26, 2008 15:02:39 GMT -5
These sorts of things are part of the politics game. You know it and I know it and I suggest you knock it off. Lighten up Arch. Telling a mod to knock it off is not advisable. I am sure there is a better way to discuss this and my suggestion would be less angry.
|
|
|
Post by doctorwho on Jul 26, 2008 15:16:46 GMT -5
These sorts of things are part of the politics game. You know it and I know it and I suggest you knock it off. Lighten up Arch. Telling a mod to knock it off is not advisable. I am sure there is a better way to discuss this and my suggestion would be less angry. Just my 2 cents - but the statement listed below shouldn't come from a mod either and then not expect a strong reply....rules tight or loose should apply equally to everyone. Of course just my opinion. " Are you opposed to things that might, in fact, bring this community back together? ""
|
|
|
Post by eb204 on Jul 26, 2008 15:28:14 GMT -5
Arch, I don't play political games, nor have I ever liked "office politics" either. My question was a sincere one and I was simply trying to get a read on what, if any, downsides there are to this game, either in your opinion or anyone else's, for that matter. Others have questioned this as well here and I'm trying to see the other side of things. You have stated you see none - great - you've answered my question. No political game. I apologize to all, if the "certain neighborhoods" comment was out of line. However, in light of things going on in this district of late, I don't feel it is a stretch to question the motives of anyone in this district at this point. And that is my other concern with cancelling this game. I, and others as they've stated, think this is such a good thing for this district and a great way to bring all communities together for a common good. Perhaps with more events such as this, everyone in this community might forget there are "certain neighborhoods" and we can all be one community again. It's a long shot, I know, but it certainly can't hurt. This was the political game statement: "You seem very much opposed to this game as well, Arch. I'm curious as to why." You flat out made an accusatory post about my position and did not ask my opinion on the basketball game. Edit: Let me add another line from the paragraph I pulled the first quote from: " Are you opposed to things that might, in fact, bring this community back together? " Wow, another presumption based on the first false strawman argument you posted about me supposedly being 'opposed' to the game. These sorts of things are part of the politics game. You know it and I know it and I suggest you knock it off. It seems that no matter how I've tried to explain it or apologize for any misinterpretation, something else is being read into my statements. I have no control over how you choose to interpret them and it is obvious any efforts on my part will not satisfy you. Your mind is made up about my motives, even though they are presumptuous on your part. You do not know me. When I say I don't play political games, I don't play political games. So I guess we'll have to agree to disagree on this. And if I weren't so good natured in general, I'd consider your warning to "knock it off" a personal attack. But I'll let it slide this time. I actually had to do a double take to see if you had been made a moderator on this board, but alas, you haven't. So, kindly keep those reprimands to yourself.
|
|
|
Post by gatormom on Jul 26, 2008 15:28:34 GMT -5
Lighten up Arch. Telling a mod to knock it off is not advisable. I am sure there is a better way to discuss this and my suggestion would be less angry. Just my 2 cents - but the statement listed below shouldn't come from a mod either and then not expect a strong reply....rules tight or loose should apply equally to everyone. Of course just my opinion. " Are you opposed to things that might, in fact, bring this community back together? "" It was a question. Arch is free to answer it. If you have a question about the behavior of a mod, please feel free to contact any of the admins; Parent, T1P, or me.
|
|
|
Post by eb204 on Jul 26, 2008 15:30:49 GMT -5
Lighten up Arch. Telling a mod to knock it off is not advisable. I am sure there is a better way to discuss this and my suggestion would be less angry. Just my 2 cents - but the statement listed below shouldn't come from a mod either and then not expect a strong reply....rules tight or loose should apply equally to everyone. Of course just my opinion. " Are you opposed to things that might, in fact, bring this community back together? "" It was a very simple question, but how it is interpreted is, again, out of my control.
|
|
|
Post by eb204 on Jul 26, 2008 15:36:30 GMT -5
I have been reading this discussion with interest. I am concerned that an opportunity for raising money for scholarships is lost. I do hope that the IPPC board has something up their sleeves to replace those funds. Anyone trying to raise money in today's economic climate understands that funds are very limited in all areas of fundraising. I do wonder why it was cancelled. Is there a good reason or set of reasons for canceling it? This is hard for me to understand as a non-IPPC person. A fun event that raised a lot of money last year with all the pieces ready to move forward is cancelled. There just has to be a real good reason, right? This is the question that remains and I suppose it will get answered in due time. Maybe if the reasoning was shared and understood, an alternative solution could be presented that doesn't conflict with that reasoning.
|
|
|
Post by wvhsparent on Jul 26, 2008 15:38:56 GMT -5
I think everyone needs to turn the volume down a few notches. You (collectively) are reading way too much into the posts.
We are all adults here.................
|
|
|
Post by Arch on Jul 26, 2008 15:47:03 GMT -5
Just my 2 cents - but the statement listed below shouldn't come from a mod either and then not expect a strong reply....rules tight or loose should apply equally to everyone. Of course just my opinion. " Are you opposed to things that might, in fact, bring this community back together? "" It was a question. Arch is free to answer it. If you have a question about the behavior of a mod, please feel free to contact any of the admins; Parent, T1P, or me. Generically, the answer is no I am not opposed to them. However, a mod presumed to speak FOR me and claim I was opposed to it.
|
|
|
Post by Arch on Jul 26, 2008 15:51:12 GMT -5
This was the political game statement: "You seem very much opposed to this game as well, Arch. I'm curious as to why." You flat out made an accusatory post about my position and did not ask my opinion on the basketball game. Edit: Let me add another line from the paragraph I pulled the first quote from: " Are you opposed to things that might, in fact, bring this community back together? " Wow, another presumption based on the first false strawman argument you posted about me supposedly being 'opposed' to the game. These sorts of things are part of the politics game. You know it and I know it and I suggest you knock it off. It seems that no matter how I've tried to explain it or apologize for any misinterpretation, something else is being read into my statements. I have no control over how you choose to interpret them and it is obvious any efforts on my part will not satisfy you. Your mind is made up about my motives, even though they are presumptuous on your part. You do not know me. When I say I don't play political games, I don't play political games. So I guess we'll have to agree to disagree on this. And if I weren't so good natured in general, I'd consider your warning to "knock it off" a personal attack. But I'll let it slide this time. I actually had to do a double take to see if you had been made a moderator on this board, but alas, you haven't. So, kindly keep those reprimands to yourself. Taking a page from your book, I merely made a suggestion based on where I know it can head to having been in the online community for over two decades. If you wish to take it as a personal attack, "I have no control over how you choose to interpret them and it is obvious any efforts on my part will not satisfy you. Your mind is made up about my motives, even though they are presumptuous on your part. You do not know me. " Again, the door swings both directions here I'm afraid.
|
|
|
Post by doctorwho on Jul 26, 2008 19:54:15 GMT -5
Just my 2 cents - but the statement listed below shouldn't come from a mod either and then not expect a strong reply....rules tight or loose should apply equally to everyone. Of course just my opinion. " Are you opposed to things that might, in fact, bring this community back together? "" It was a question. Arch is free to answer it. If you have a question about the behavior of a mod, please feel free to contact any of the admins; Parent, T1P, or me. I have no reason to pursue it other than to give my opinion - it was a lead in question that will solicit a strong response one way or the other. If everyone chooses to ignore that, you are within your powers to do so.
|
|
|
Post by wvhsparent on Jul 26, 2008 20:26:09 GMT -5
It appears we all might have jumped to wrong conclusions...... here is a recent correspondence from IPPC on the b-ball game
Dear IPPC colleagues,
We have received a number of questions regarding the IPPC Scholarship Basketball Game recently. The 2008 event has been canceled because of our responsibility to uphold the bylaws of our organization and our respect for our local unit members to participate in the process.
As required by Illinois PTA, Article V, #Section 3 of our bylaws state:
"The council shall not legislate for local PTAs/PTSAs. However, by a majority vote of the local PTA/PTSA units in membership, the Council may initiate action in matters of common interest within Council boundaries."
If we are to adhere to the bylaws that serve as the foundation of our organization, the IPPC Executive Committee cannot unilaterally decide to pursue this initiative and thereby compel local units to participate since a membership vote was never taken to host a 2008 community-wide IPPC Scholarship Basketball Game.
This matter is on the agenda for our first IPPC meeting of the year, scheduled for September 18, 2008. We welcome your input at that time. The Executive Committee will be happy to facilitate the organization of an event of our members' choosing, provided a majority of the membership vote to initiate such action.
On behalf of the IPPC Executive Committee, Robin Church IPPC President
|
|