Re: [UC] FOCP response
Does anyone know why Mr. Chance does not subscribe to this listserve? I would expect the leader of a local civic association to be connected to as many sources of local information and activities as possible. What about our other civic leaders (e.g. at the Spruce Hill Community Association, the UC Historical Society and Cedar Park Neighbors) and our local politicians (Mrs. Blackwell, for instance and ward leaders and committee members)? Mary -Original Message- From: Glenn glen...@earthlink.net To: univcity@list.purple.com UnivCity@list.purple.com UnivCity@list.purple.com Sent: Sun, Apr 11, 2010 7:42 am Subject: [UC] FOCP response Sorry, I forwarded this response from FOCP earlier but it did not get posted: Responses from FOCP, Mr Chance: Glenn-- Your issue remains moot. If you want to post that interpretation anywhere feel free to do so. Glenn-- Robert's Rules indicates that the Chair (in this case the President of the Association) can determine by estimating the house whether there is a quorum. If no member calls for an official count of the house, a quorum is assumed to be present. Since no call was made, all actions taken are legal according to the bylaws. As the meeting has now ended (several months ago) any calls for a quorum count are moot at this time. A member who wishes to contest the election may of course bring this up at a future meeting, but no member has come forward to do so at this point. By the way, by my informal count there were 18 members in the room, satisfying our quorum of 10% of members in good standing, since the Friends of Clark Park had 172 members as of that night. So any assertion on your part that the FoCP is running illegally is nonsense. However, we will be happy for your assistance in bringing greater attendance to future meetings. The next Membership Meeting is scheduled for Wednesday, June 16 at 7 PM in Griffith Hall. I'll be happy to supply flyers to you if you are willing to help us post them in the park and around the neighborhood. The next election meeting is scheduled for Wednesday, October 20, 7 PM in Griffith Hall. If you would like to run for President of FoCP you will need to be a member before that date. Thank you for your ongoing concern for our organization. Perhaps someday you will learn how to address your concerns directly to me instead of to a listserve to which you know I do not subscribe. FLC Frank L. Chance President, Friends of Clark Park chanc...@gmail.com On Apr 9, 2010, at 6:57 PM, Brian Siano wrote: FYI. Since Glenn's not a member, I see no reason to be concerned. Neighbors, The FOCP refused my request for the minutes of their election.Once again, rules only apply to those outside of the insular inner FOCP gang. Robert's Rules is very specific for good reason. The example, that even unanimous consent about some minor issue, is not allowed; emphasizes the point. If a quorum does not exist, the meeting itself is invalid, period. How can members, not present, object to an election or any other business? This hope for manipulating parliamentary tricks, so often abused, is laughable. On the night of the election, I publicly posted the names of FOCP members present and publicly reported that FOCP did not have a quorum for the election. I had chased Fran around the room to see her list of members and informed Frank Chance and Tony West that the election was not valid You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the list named UnivCity. To unsubscribe or for archive information, see http://www.purple.com/list.html.
[UC] why community activists avoid this list (Was: Re: FOCP response)
Mary, I have been on this list since ~2001. I can name about about two dozen different community groups in the University City area, and I suspect I'm missing a few. Surely, during this time, a few of their leaders have lurked on UC-list. But I don't recall seeing any group that utilizes UC-list as a posting mechanism. Therefore, it is not really a source of much local information. Most activists I've talked to regard it more as a source of local misinformation. UC-list has become a talking shop dominated by people who know little and do nothing, but criticize big. Most activists say it's a waste of their unpaid volunteer time to read this list. I was an outlier. During my presidency of Friends of Clark Park (2003-05), I found great value in Purple and I militantly pushed my organization to use Purple as an outreach medium. As everybody knows, I'm a dedicated Purple loyalist. But I found no imitators and, in fact, wound up wading through all sorts of muck as a result of standing by Purple. My effort was a waste of time, I say now in sorrow. The core problem is that UC-list is unmoderated. As a result, in practice, it's a poor source of information -- an unsafe place in which to exchange information. It's a newspaper without an editor, a street without a cop. Now there's a better product to serve the neighborhood. So that's where the better traffic is shifting. And that leaves even less to learn from UC-list. FYI: Mr. Chance does not head a civic association but a park support group. FoCP's mission is to communicate with park users. If you are curious about anything he does, and you authentically care about the park ... shouldn't you show up at his next public meeting? FoCP has a listserve of its own, which represents this community quite well in its own way. It's not his job to come to your list, if you want to learn something from him. Community is a two-way street. -- Tony West Does anyone know why Mr. Chance does not subscribe to this listserve? I would expect the leader of a local civic association to be connected to as many sources of local information and activities as possible. What about our other civic leaders (e.g. at the Spruce Hill Community Association, the UC Historical Society and Cedar Park Neighbors) and our local politicians (Mrs. Blackwell, for instance and ward leaders and committee members)? Mary
Re: [UC] why community activists avoid this list (Was: Re: FOCP response)
I found this an insulting and crazy making post Sent via BlackBerry by ATT -Original Message- From: Anthony West anthony_w...@earthlink.net Date: Mon, 12 Apr 2010 18:11:04 To: UnivCity@list.purple.com UnivCity listservunivcity@list.purple.com Subject: [UC] why community activists avoid this list (Was: Re: FOCP response) Mary, I have been on this list since ~2001. I can name about about two dozen different community groups in the University City area, and I suspect I'm missing a few. Surely, during this time, a few of their leaders have lurked on UC-list. But I don't recall seeing any group that utilizes UC-list as a posting mechanism. Therefore, it is not really a source of much local information. Most activists I've talked to regard it more as a source of local misinformation. UC-list has become a talking shop dominated by people who know little and do nothing, but criticize big. Most activists say it's a waste of their unpaid volunteer time to read this list. I was an outlier. During my presidency of Friends of Clark Park (2003-05), I found great value in Purple and I militantly pushed my organization to use Purple as an outreach medium. As everybody knows, I'm a dedicated Purple loyalist. But I found no imitators and, in fact, wound up wading through all sorts of muck as a result of standing by Purple. My effort was a waste of time, I say now in sorrow. The core problem is that UC-list is unmoderated. As a result, in practice, it's a poor source of information -- an unsafe place in which to exchange information. It's a newspaper without an editor, a street without a cop. Now there's a better product to serve the neighborhood. So that's where the better traffic is shifting. And that leaves even less to learn from UC-list. FYI: Mr. Chance does not head a civic association but a park support group. FoCP's mission is to communicate with park users. If you are curious about anything he does, and you authentically care about the park ... shouldn't you show up at his next public meeting? FoCP has a listserve of its own, which represents this community quite well in its own way. It's not his job to come to your list, if you want to learn something from him. Community is a two-way street. -- Tony West Does anyone know why Mr. Chance does not subscribe to this listserve? I would expect the leader of a local civic association to be connected to as many sources of local information and activities as possible. What about our other civic leaders (e.g. at the Spruce Hill Community Association, the UC Historical Society and Cedar Park Neighbors) and our local politicians (Mrs. Blackwell, for instance and ward leaders and committee members)? Mary
Re: [UC] FOCP response
Dear Mary, As a member of several UC Community Associations and as one of the Board Officers of Spruce Hill Community Association who helped to start the listserv that is now UC Listserv. Former resident Jeff Abramson took it from LibertyNet and put in on purple list from the Spruce Hill LibertyNet listserv. I whole heartedly agree civic leaders of various UC organizations should subscribe unless there is an opposition as to how they represent the transition of West Phila. community to University City with regard to those who raise questions. Trust me, Jannie Blackwell, Jim Roebuck, Committee and Ward Leaders are on this list and have been for a long time. On 4/12/10 2:39 PM, mcget...@aol.com mcget...@aol.com wrote: Does anyone know why Mr. Chance does not subscribe to this listserve? I would expect the leader of a local civic association to be connected to as many sources of local information and activities as possible. What about our other civic leaders (e.g. at the Spruce Hill Community Association, the UC Historical Society and Cedar Park Neighbors) and our local politicians (Mrs. Blackwell, for instance and ward leaders and committee members)? Mary -Original Message- From: Glenn glen...@earthlink.net To: univcity@list.purple.com UnivCity@list.purple.com UnivCity@list.purple.com Sent: Sun, Apr 11, 2010 7:42 am Subject: [UC] FOCP response Sorry, I forwarded this response from FOCP earlier but it did not get posted: Responses from FOCP, Mr Chance: Glenn-- Your issue remains moot. If you want to post that interpretation anywhere feel free to do so. -- -- Glenn-- Robert's Rules indicates that the Chair (in this case the President of the Association) can determine by estimating the house whether there is a quorum. If no member calls for an official count of the house, a quorum is assumed to be present. Since no call was made, all actions taken are legal according to the bylaws. As the meeting has now ended (several months ago) any calls for a quorum count are moot at this time. A member who wishes to contest the election may of course bring this up at a future meeting, but no member has come forward to do so at this point. By the way, by my informal count there were 18 members in the room, satisfying our quorum of 10% of members in good standing, since the Friends of Clark Park had 172 members as of that night. So any assertion on your part that the FoCP is running illegally is nonsense. However, we will be happy for your assistance in bringing greater attendance to future meetings. The next Membership Meeting is scheduled for Wednesday, June 16 at 7 PM in Griffith Hall. I'll be happy to supply flyers to you if you are willing to help us post them in the park and around the neighborhood. The next election meeting is scheduled for Wednesday, October 20, 7 PM in Griffith Hall. If you would like to run for President of FoCP you will need to be a member before that date. Thank you for your ongoing concern for our organization. Perhaps someday you will learn how to address your concerns directly to me instead of to a listserve to which you know I do not subscribe. FLC Frank L. Chance President, Friends of Clark Park chanc...@gmail.com On Apr 9, 2010, at 6:57 PM, Brian Siano wrote: FYI. Since Glenn's not a member, I see no reason to be concerned. Neighbors, The FOCP refused my request for the minutes of their election.Once again, rules only apply to those outside of the insular inner FOCP gang. Robert's Rules is very specific for good reason. The example, that even unanimous consent about some minor issue, is not allowed; emphasizes the point. If a quorum does not exist, the meeting itself is invalid, period. How can members, not present, object to an election or any other business? This hope for manipulating parliamentary tricks, so often abused, is laughable. On the night of the election, I publicly posted the names of FOCP members present and publicly reported that FOCP did not have a quorum for the election. I had chased Fran around the room to see her list of members and informed Frank Chance and Tony West that the election was not valid You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the list named UnivCity. To unsubscribe or for archive information, see http://www.purple.com/list.html.
Re: [UC] why community activists avoid this list
Really, Liz? I thought it calm, informative, observant and factual. Of the numerous community groups in University City City, how many can you name whose activists use UC-list as an information medium? If they don't in fact, use it ... do you have an alternative explanation for why they don't, which is better than my explanation? Why do you think the following vibrant groups seldom comment on this listserve (I'm all ears)? -- Friends of Clark Park, Friends of Malcolm X Park, Friends of Barkan Park, Friends of the Walnut Street West Library, Penn Alexander HSA, Lee HSA, Wilson HSA, University City Historical Society, the A-Space, Powelton Civic Ass'n, Walnut Hill Community Ass'n, Cedar Park Neighbors, Garden Court Community Association, Spruce Hill Community Association, West Shore Community, Dist. Health Ctr. 3, University Square Association, Woodland Ave. Reunion, University City City Arts League, People's Emergency Ctr., Community Education Ctr. (I could go on and on.) (A) Why do you think none of these groups want to touch this listserve with a 10-foot pole? (B) Why do you think it's the messenger's fault (me) for pointing out the obvious? I think these data more likely point to a flaw in UC-list's underlying design. But if you can correct these flaws and solve these problems, you know I'll stick with it! -- Tony West On 4/12/2010 6:40 PM, campio...@juno.com wrote: I found this an insulting and crazy making post
Re: [UC] FOCP response
Relax, everyone. If anything important turns up here, I forward it to Frank Chance. I've even been known to forward him nonsensical garbage from this list as well. That should be sufficient for y'all. This list is bad enough, with the crazy accusations, insults at the other list, constant demands to unsubscribe... and now some of you are _demanding_ that people subscribe if they want to run a community group? On Mon, Apr 12, 2010 at 6:56 PM, Alex de Soto wil.p...@comcast.net wrote: Dear Mary, As a member of several UC Community Associations and as one of the Board Officers of Spruce Hill Community Association who helped to start the listserv that is now UC Listserv. Former resident Jeff Abramson took it from LibertyNet and put in on purple list from the Spruce Hill LibertyNet listserv. I whole heartedly agree civic leaders of various UC organizations should subscribe unless there is an opposition as to how they represent the transition of West Phila. community to University City with regard to those who raise questions. Trust me, Jannie Blackwell, Jim Roebuck, Committee and Ward Leaders are on this list and have been for a long time. On 4/12/10 2:39 PM, mcget...@aol.com mcget...@aol.com wrote: Does anyone know why Mr. Chance does not subscribe to this listserve? I would expect the leader of a local civic association to be connected to as many sources of local information and activities as possible. What about our other civic leaders (e.g. at the Spruce Hill Community Association, the UC Historical Society and Cedar Park Neighbors) and our local politicians (Mrs. Blackwell, for instance and ward leaders and committee members)? Mary -Original Message- From: Glenn glen...@earthlink.net To: univcity@list.purple.com UnivCity@list.purple.com UnivCity@list.purple.com Sent: Sun, Apr 11, 2010 7:42 am Subject: [UC] FOCP response Sorry, I forwarded this response from FOCP earlier but it did not get posted: Responses from FOCP, Mr Chance: Glenn-- Your issue remains moot. If you want to post that interpretation anywhere feel free to do so. Glenn-- Robert's Rules indicates that the Chair (in this case the President of the Association) can determine by estimating the house whether there is a quorum. If no member calls for an official count of the house, a quorum is assumed to be present. Since no call was made, all actions taken are legal according to the bylaws. As the meeting has now ended (several months ago) any calls for a quorum count are moot at this time. A member who wishes to contest the election may of course bring this up at a future meeting, but no member has come forward to do so at this point. By the way, by my informal count there were 18 members in the room, satisfying our quorum of 10% of members in good standing, since the Friends of Clark Park had 172 members as of that night. So any assertion on your part that the FoCP is running illegally is nonsense. However, we will be happy for your assistance in bringing greater attendance to future meetings. The next Membership Meeting is scheduled for Wednesday, June 16 at 7 PM in Griffith Hall. I'll be happy to supply flyers to you if you are willing to help us post them in the park and around the neighborhood. The next election meeting is scheduled for Wednesday, October 20, 7 PM in Griffith Hall. If you would like to run for President of FoCP you will need to be a member before that date. Thank you for your ongoing concern for our organization. Perhaps someday you will learn how to address your concerns directly to me instead of to a listserve to which you know I do not subscribe. FLC Frank L. Chance President, Friends of Clark Park chanc...@gmail.com On Apr 9, 2010, at 6:57 PM, Brian Siano wrote: FYI. Since Glenn's not a member, I see no reason to be concerned. Neighbors, The FOCP refused my request for the minutes of their election.Once again, rules only apply to those outside of the insular inner FOCP gang. Robert's Rules is very specific for good reason. The example, that even unanimous consent about some minor issue, is not allowed; emphasizes the point. If a quorum does not exist, the meeting itself is invalid, period. How can members, not present, object to an election or any other business? This hope for manipulating parliamentary tricks, so often abused, is laughable. On the night of the election, I publicly posted the names of FOCP members present and publicly reported that FOCP did not have a quorum for the election. I had chased Fran around the room to see her list of members and informed Frank Chance and Tony West that the election was not valid You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the list named UnivCity. To unsubscribe or for archive information, see http://www.purple.com/list.html
Re: [UC] why community activists avoid this list (Was: Re: FOCP response)
Well, Tony, Since the listserv began in 1996 and the Internet not so long before, University City was one of the first changing neighborhoods in the City of Philadelphia to even HAVE so many on the Internet that we could even form a listserv. A prodigious achievement in this city that may now be taken for granted in the era of the iPad. Even though I predate you on the UC listserv, I recall being one of the youngsters who were plugged in during the early 90¹s and knew about how to use the Web. I also recall the impetus of the Penn Mortgage Program in 1995 and no longer having to show houses on Community Group Organized UC Saturday¹s. THAT¹S when everything changed and could be discussed on the Web. Beforehand, the same divergent points of view about community development were done solely through 501-C3 associations, and were not accessible to the entire community. The UC Listserv has the distinction of being one of the first in this city to make this happen, much to the chagrin of some. -Wilma On 4/12/10 6:11 PM, Anthony West anthony_w...@earthlink.net wrote: Mary, I have been on this list since ~2001. I can name about about two dozen different community groups in the University City area, and I suspect I'm missing a few. Surely, during this time, a few of their leaders have lurked on UC-list. But I don't recall seeing any group that utilizes UC-list as a posting mechanism. Therefore, it is not really a source of much local information. Most activists I've talked to regard it more as a source of local misinformation. UC-list has become a talking shop dominated by people who know little and do nothing, but criticize big. Most activists say it's a waste of their unpaid volunteer time to read this list. I was an outlier. During my presidency of Friends of Clark Park (2003-05), I found great value in Purple and I militantly pushed my organization to use Purple as an outreach medium. As everybody knows, I'm a dedicated Purple loyalist. But I found no imitators and, in fact, wound up wading through all sorts of muck as a result of standing by Purple. My effort was a waste of time, I say now in sorrow. The core problem is that UC-list is unmoderated. As a result, in practice, it's a poor source of information -- an unsafe place in which to exchange information. It's a newspaper without an editor, a street without a cop. Now there's a better product to serve the neighborhood. So that's where the better traffic is shifting. And that leaves even less to learn from UC-list. FYI: Mr. Chance does not head a civic association but a park support group. FoCP's mission is to communicate with park users. If you are curious about anything he does, and you authentically care about the park ... shouldn't you show up at his next public meeting? FoCP has a listserve of its own, which represents this community quite well in its own way. It's not his job to come to your list, if you want to learn something from him. Community is a two-way street. -- Tony West Does anyone know why Mr. Chance does not subscribe to this listserve? I would expect the leader of a local civic association to be connected to as many sources of local information and activities as possible. What about our other civic leaders (e.g. at the Spruce Hill Community Association, the UC Historical Society and Cedar Park Neighbors) and our local politicians (Mrs. Blackwell, for instance and ward leaders and committee members)? Mary
Re: [UC] why community activists avoid this list (Was: Re: FOCP response)
On Apr 12, 2010, at 06:11 PM, Anthony West wrote: Most activists say it's a waste of their unpaid volunteer time to read this list. informative, observant and factual? Did someone do a survey or is this just your factual opinion? Frank You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the list named UnivCity. To unsubscribe or for archive information, see http://www.purple.com/list.html.
[UC] why community activists avoid this list (Was: Re: FOCP response)
I don't think the Councilwoman reads UC-list posts personally. She's not a big internet fan (and who can blame her?). Of course, someone on her paid staff always monitors UC-list. Other politicians, with budgets to hire employees, can direct their employees to read UC-list, along with the other neighborhood lists. But none of them use it as an interactive communications medium. That's a fact. Volunteer neighborhood activists have even less incentive to spend their free time dialoguing with cranks on UC-list. It doesn't pay. It's not that every UC-list subscriber is a crank. It's that the cranks increasingly drown out the discussion, so that normal neighbors have a hard time discussing normal neighborhood issues on this listserve in a normal manner. That's why people keep asking for advice on how to leave it. We don't see this phenomenon on UCNeighbors -- people begging for advice on how to unsubscribe. People who have a reason to reach out to the most University City residents possible, should begin with the most-popular listerve, which is UCNeighbors. After that comes UC-list, then PFSNI. -- Tony West On 4/12/2010 6:56 PM, Alex de Soto wrote: Trust me, Jannie Blackwell, Jim Roebuck, Committee and Ward Leaders are on this list and have been for a long time.
Re: [UC] why community activists avoid this list
No, Tony, Liz is right. I know this because she was here when our UC Listserv was one of the first in the city. It was formed by a community group, but that should not be a requisite criterion for its legitimacy. Pray tell why UCNeighbors represents community groups better and from where sprang their legitimacy to represent the community? As to why people do not want to touch this listserv with a ten-foot pole might be because of what they thought this community was and cannot accept any other versions. On 4/12/10 7:05 PM, Anthony West anthony_w...@earthlink.net wrote: Really, Liz? I thought it calm, informative, observant and factual. Of the numerous community groups in University City City, how many can you name whose activists use UC-list as an information medium? If they don't in fact, use it ... do you have an alternative explanation for why they don't, which is better than my explanation? Why do you think the following vibrant groups seldom comment on this listserve (I'm all ears)? -- Friends of Clark Park, Friends of Malcolm X Park, Friends of Barkan Park, Friends of the Walnut Street West Library, Penn Alexander HSA, Lee HSA, Wilson HSA, University City Historical Society, the A-Space, Powelton Civic Ass'n, Walnut Hill Community Ass'n, Cedar Park Neighbors, Garden Court Community Association, Spruce Hill Community Association, West Shore Community, Dist. Health Ctr. 3, University Square Association, Woodland Ave. Reunion, University City City Arts League, People's Emergency Ctr., Community Education Ctr. (I could go on and on.) (A) Why do you think none of these groups want to touch this listserve with a 10-foot pole? (B) Why do you think it's the messenger's fault (me) for pointing out the obvious? I think these data more likely point to a flaw in UC-list's underlying design. But if you can correct these flaws and solve these problems, you know I'll stick with it! -- Tony West On 4/12/2010 6:40 PM, campio...@juno.com wrote: I found this an insulting and crazy making post
Re: [UC] why community activists avoid this list (Was: Re: FOCP response)
Hi Frank. Always glad to talk with a fellow UC-list supporter. This is my opinion. I earn a humble living by determining which, among a welter of reports, are informative, observant and factual; so please excuse me if I extend my work habits to this listserve. Since it's an unmoderated listserve, I can't deny that deceptive, ignorant, shameless and false statements have equal right to be published on UC-list. That's what UC-list is best known for, among neighborhood movers and shakers who read the internet. It's the listserve where nobody who actually does anything around here, writes anything. Do you disagree with me? -- Tony West informative, observant and factual? Did someone do a survey or is this just your factual opinion? Frank You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the list named UnivCity. To unsubscribe or for archive information, see http://www.purple.com/list.html.
Re: [UC] why community activists avoid this list
I can't tell what you think Liz is right about, Alex. I already have said, more than once, that I thought UC-list was one of the first in the city and that it brilliantly met my needs as a neighbor in University City. But it's beyond question that it no longer does so. Duh? Legitimacy is a baloney slogan. UC-list is nothing more than an info medium, just like my newspaper. Just because someone named it UC-list long, long ago doesn't grant it any unique right to speak for the University City community. Statistically, it doesn't seem to do so anymore. UC-list is all about quarreling and disputing, isn't it? Nobody ever says anything positive about our neighborhood on it, and that includes you. UCNeighbors represents community groups better, because it likes our neighborhood more than UC-list. (I think of it as UCQuarrels.) To keep serving your community -- you can't just rely on your internet name! You have to keep learning about it and keep adapting to it as it grows and develops. Otherwise, you'll be left in the ditch. -- Tony West On 4/12/2010 7:36 PM, Alex de Soto wrote: No, Tony, Liz is right. I know this because she was here when our UC Listserv was one of the first in the city. It was formed by a community group, but that should not be a requisite criterion for its legitimacy. Pray tell why UCNeighbors represents community groups better and from where sprang their legitimacy to represent the community? As to why people do not want to touch this listserv with a ten-foot pole might be because of what they thought this community was and cannot accept any other versions.
Re: [UC] why community activists avoid this list
Sorry, Tony. It¹s just me Wilma. I changed my email account, but not ³Himself¹s ³name as first person. Her assertion that it was an insulting post is nearly the same as my, ³Wow! That¹s a slap in the face², post from last week. It is indeed! I shall try to re-instate my name. On 4/12/10 8:03 PM, Anthony West anthony_w...@earthlink.net wrote: I can't tell what you think Liz is right about, Alex. I already have said, more than once, that I thought UC-list was one of the first in the city and that it brilliantly met my needs as a neighbor in University City. But it's beyond question that it no longer does so. Duh? Legitimacy is a baloney slogan. UC-list is nothing more than an info medium, just like my newspaper. Just because someone named it UC-list long, long ago doesn't grant it any unique right to speak for the University City community. Statistically, it doesn't seem to do so anymore. UC-list is all about quarreling and disputing, isn't it? Nobody ever says anything positive about our neighborhood on it, and that includes you. UCNeighbors represents community groups better, because it likes our neighborhood more than UC-list. (I think of it as UCQuarrels.) To keep serving your community -- you can't just rely on your internet name! You have to keep learning about it and keep adapting to it as it grows and develops. Otherwise, you'll be left in the ditch. -- Tony West On 4/12/2010 7:36 PM, Alex de Soto wrote: Re: [UC] why community activists avoid this list No, Tony, Liz is right. I know this because she was here when our UC Listserv was one of the first in the city. It was formed by a community group, but that should not be a requisite criterion for its legitimacy. Pray tell why UCNeighbors represents community groups better and from where sprang their legitimacy to represent the community? As to why people do not want to touch this listserv with a ten-foot pole might be because of what they thought this community was and cannot accept any other versions.
[UC] FOUND: older, chocolate lab (dog) - 43rd+Pine
This was just posted to craigslist. Anyone know this pooch? Please forward to your doggy friends... -linda Older, Chocolate Lab Found (43rd Pine) Date: 2010-04-12, 7:45PM EDT Reply to: ruthieg...@gmail.com [Errors when replying to ads?] Older lab found wandering at 43rd Pine Street, Monday April 12th @ appx 6:30pm. She's wearing a blue harness and a Grateful Dead dancing bears collar but no tags. She's friendly but anxious to go home. Please call 267-255-0145 or email asap as I have a zoo in my home already. Location: 43rd Pine it's NOT ok to contact this poster with services or other commercial interests PostingID: 1689256940
Re: [UC] why community activists avoid this list (Was: Re: FOCP response)
On the other hand, a moderated list runs the risk of reflecting only the views of the moderator. In this case I can't say that this hasn't happened. Frank On Apr 12, 2010, at 07:41 PM, Anthony West wrote: Hi Frank. Always glad to talk with a fellow UC-list supporter. This is my opinion. I earn a humble living by determining which, among a welter of reports, are informative, observant and factual; so please excuse me if I extend my work habits to this listserve. Since it's an unmoderated listserve, I can't deny that deceptive, ignorant, shameless and false statements have equal right to be published on UC-list. That's what UC-list is best known for, among neighborhood movers and shakers who read the internet. It's the listserve where nobody who actually does anything around here, writes anything. Do you disagree with me? -- Tony West informative, observant and factual? Did someone do a survey or is this just your factual opinion? Frank You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the list named UnivCity. To unsubscribe or for archive information, see http://www.purple.com/list.html. You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the list named UnivCity. To unsubscribe or for archive information, see http://www.purple.com/list.html.
[UC] LOST: Mini Pinscher (dog)
note: purple won't let me include the photo for this pooch. She is two tones of brown, is thin, and has tall, perky ears. and a tail that curls up. Not sure where she was lost from, but she could be anywhere now... -LL Begin forwarded message: From: Melissa jerzie_girl2...@yahoo.com Date: April 12, 2010 4:41:44 PM EDT Subject: [UCNeighbors] Lost Mini-Pinscher dog Reply-To: jerzie_girl2...@yahoo.com Hi all, A colleague of mine who lives in the neighborhood lost her mini- pinscher; her name is Carmel Ann. She has a pink collar and red West Chester Twnshp tag. Please email her ataca...@ccp.edu if you see her - photo attached. Thanks! Melissa
Re: [UC] why community activists avoid this list
It does run that risk. No such thing as a risk-free, or perfectly reflective, neighborhood listserve! There is only better and worse. An unmoderated listserve runs an equal risk of reflecting only the views of discredited streetcorner ranters, because they are the only public speakers who have nothing better to do with their time -- but can't withstand any judgemental filter for their writing. So they wind up clogging the drain on UC-list. They're not that much fun, and they're not very informative either. -- Tony West On 4/12/2010 8:48 PM, Frank Carroll wrote: On the other hand, a moderated list runs the risk of reflecting only the views of the moderator. In this case I can't say that this hasn't happened. You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the list named UnivCity. To unsubscribe or for archive information, see http://www.purple.com/list.html.
Re: [UC] why community activists avoid this list
At 7:05 Tony directed some questions to me, in response to my post which stated that I found his comments about the UC list and its members insulting. I am seeing these questions now, along with several other posts by Tony, which continue to insult the UnivCity List and its members. Even when Tony throws in the occasional compliments he managed to make them sound grudging or gratuitous. I consider myself ACTIVE in several neighborhood organizations, and SUPPORTIVE of many others. I read many positive posts on both lists. I read many thoughtful posts on both lists. I don't think it is appropriate to define either list as a complete or accurate voice for the community. I have previously posted my frustration at the failure of many self-described leaders to engage the members of our community who are not on either list, or any e-lists. MY neighborhood includes the elderly, immigrants, pre-schoolers and people who don't have the luxury of home computers. I don't see any huge political difference between the two lists. UCNeighbors is sometimes more arty or playful, thanks to Kyle and Ross. UnivCity seems a little more practical and more open to penetrating discussions and discord. Ultimately I don't see the need for the competitive narcissism that Tony seem to be promoting as he harps on the superiority of one list (and its members) over the other. The reality in most cases is probably WE is THEY. Does anyone know the percentage of overlap? I bet it is quite high. Wilma makes wonderful contributions. Some may on the face seem negative while reading to me as a search for acknowledgment of an ongoing need to bridge class, race and cultural differences. She did not deserve Tony's attack. Sadly, Tony's 9:50 PM post reads, to me, like projection. Was Tony looking in a mirror when he wrote, An unmoderated listserve runs an equal risk of reflecting only the views of discredited streetcorner ranters, because they are the only public speakers who have nothing better to do with their time -- but can't withstand any judgemental filter for their writing. So they wind up clogging the drain on UC-list. They're not that much fun, and they're not very informative either. I read this as his autobiography for today. Some days Tony makes wonderful contributions. Today, not so much. I am tired of people who deny their own behavior, even while they are attacking similar behavior in others. I am happy to have access to both UnivCIty and UCNeighbors. I am grateful to Jeff and Kyle for the tools they have given us. I am no fan of Glenn's methods but, just because he often acts obsessed or sounds paranoid, it doesn't mean he's always wrong. I hope all enjoy some lovely rest and wake up charged up o do well while doing good. Best! Liz Please note: message attached From: Anthony West anthony_w...@earthlink.net To: UnivCity@list.purple.com UnivCity listserv univcity@list.purple.com Subject: Re: [UC] why community activists avoid this list Date: Mon, 12 Apr 2010 19:05:19 -0400 Really, Liz? I thought it calm, informative, observant and factual. Of the numerous community groups in University City City, how many can you name whose activists use UC-list as an information medium? If they don't in fact, use it ... do you have an alternative explanation for why they don't, which is better than my explanation? Why do you think the following vibrant groups seldom comment on this listserve (I'm all ears)? -- Friends of Clark Park, Friends of Malcolm X Park, Friends of Barkan Park, Friends of the Walnut Street West Library, Penn Alexander HSA, Lee HSA, Wilson HSA, University City Historical Society, the A-Space, Powelton Civic Ass'n, Walnut Hill Community Ass'n, Cedar Park Neighbors, Garden Court Community Association, Spruce Hill Community Association, West Shore Community, Dist. Health Ctr. 3, University Square Association, Woodland Ave. Reunion, University City City Arts League, People's Emergency Ctr., Community Education Ctr. (I could go on and on.) (A) Why do you think none of these groups want to touch this listserve with a 10-foot pole? (B) Why do you think it's the messenger's fault (me) for pointing out the obvious? I think these data more likely point to a flaw in UC-list's underlying design. But if you can correct these flaws and solve these problems, you know I'll stick with it! -- Tony West Top 3 Wrinkle Creams Look years younger without painful injections/surgery. Try now! http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3141/4bc3eb0f681492142e4st04vuc---BeginMessage--- Really, Liz? I thought it calm, informative, observant and factual. Of the numerous community groups in University City City, how many can you name whose activists use UC-list as an information medium? If they don't in fact, use it ... do you have an alternative explanation for why they don't, which is better than my explanation? Why do you think the
[UC] Penn Alexander 100% low-income?
Did anyone else notice that in the Inquirer¹s Report Card on the Schools, Penn Alexander is identified as having 100% low-income students? Does anyone else find this extremely hard to believe? I thought maybe it was an error on the Inky¹s part, but I looked at the raw data on the state¹s website, and it has Penn Alexander reporting pretty close to 100% ³economically disadvantaged² students grades 3-8. This seems unbelievable to me. But maybe there is a reasonable explanation? I¹m considering writing the Inquirer reporters or editors who put the report together to look into it, but thought maybe folks more knowledgeable than I might have some insight into this. Before I get accused of hating on the neighborhood or trying to tear things down or sour grapes or something, it is a significant matter to me. As the parent of a three-year-old who is trying to research and compare future schools, I want to compare apples with apples, and I believe that schools with high percentages of low-income students have a much bigger challenge than schools with lower-percentages, and so test scores need to be considered in light of those factors. This is not only my belief the quintile scoring system compares ³similar schools² based on percentage of low-income students. So, not only would an error in this regard make my job harder, but it would, it seems to me, skew the ³similar schools² comparison. I¹m interested to hear what folks think about this. Kimm
