Re: [UC] Fallacious argumentation and gang strategy
Don't even try it. Frankus Sleek. Edgy. Infinitely flexible. On Nov 12, 2007, at 8:34 PM, Anthony West wrote: It's all in the numbers, Frank -- in this case, a number expressing distance. 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] Fallacious argumentation and gang strategy - and still in court?
It's all in the numbers, Frank -- in this case, a number expressing distance. Tony- You may want to check with Mary Tracy and the SCRUB people to see if what you suggest is still winding its way through the appeals courts. If so, all tax payers still have a say and opposing counsel can note its objection for the record, though Chairman Auspitz is alleged to know better than Everyman. ? If I am mistaken, will someone please address the current case law? Thanks. Ciao, Craig -Original Message- From: Anthony West [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: UnivCity listserv UnivCity@list.purple.com Sent: Mon, 12 Nov 2007 8:34 pm Subject: Re: [UC] Fallacious argumentation and gang strategy Here is one case where numbers clearly do matter.? ? If you do live a half block from this project, then you fall inside the area in which ZBA traditionally seeks to note neighborhood impact. There is a legal channel in which you can express your opposition. You don't enjoy individual veto power, and I'm not sure if ZBA cares as much what you think if you rent instead of own, but you have some degree of statutory say.? ? If, however, you live at 44th Larchwood as I do, then your opinion is much less weighty. I still am a member of SHCA, so I have some say about what that organization says.? ? If I lived west of 46th St., my opinion would carry almost no organizational weight, although I'd still be free to express myself to anyone who cared to listen.? ? It's all in the numbers, Frank -- in this case, a number expressing distance.? ? -- Tony West? ? Absolutely true, as was the rest of your message. I am sick and tired of being told that my opinion doesn't matter because I'm not running numbers or otherwise too ignorant to understand a project, whether it's redesigning a park or building a hotel. It's arrogant and condescending as well as untrue. I suppose I need to be looking over the shoulders of the architects to know whether or not I want an 11-story hotel a half block from my house.? ? Frankus? Sleek. Edgy. Infinitely flexible.? ? ? On Nov 11, 2007, at 11:11 PM, Glenn wrote:? ? But look at the point the barking cheese gang always? makes in all posts. Those whom ask questions about? the cronies of their gangs should shut up simply? because their character is so defective and they're? stupid and silly.? ? ? 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.? Email and AIM finally together. You've gotta check out free AOL Mail! - http://mail.aol.com
Re: [UC] Fallacious argumentation and gang strategy
Absolutely true, as was the rest of your message. I am sick and tired of being told that my opinion doesn't matter because I'm not running numbers or otherwise too ignorant to understand a project, whether it's redesigning a park or building a hotel. It's arrogant and condescending as well as untrue. I suppose I need to be looking over the shoulders of the architects to know whether or not I want an 11- story hotel a half block from my house. Frankus Sleek. Edgy. Infinitely flexible. On Nov 11, 2007, at 11:11 PM, Glenn wrote: But look at the point the barking cheese gang always makes in all posts. Those whom ask questions about the cronies of their gangs should shut up simply because their character is so defective and they're stupid and silly. 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] Fallacious argumentation and gang strategy
Here is one case where numbers clearly do matter. If you do live a half block from this project, then you fall inside the area in which ZBA traditionally seeks to note neighborhood impact. There is a legal channel in which you can express your opposition. You don't enjoy individual veto power, and I'm not sure if ZBA cares as much what you think if you rent instead of own, but you have some degree of statutory say. If, however, you live at 44th Larchwood as I do, then your opinion is much less weighty. I still am a member of SHCA, so I have some say about what that organization says. If I lived west of 46th St., my opinion would carry almost no organizational weight, although I'd still be free to express myself to anyone who cared to listen. It's all in the numbers, Frank -- in this case, a number expressing distance. -- Tony West Absolutely true, as was the rest of your message. I am sick and tired of being told that my opinion doesn't matter because I'm not running numbers or otherwise too ignorant to understand a project, whether it's redesigning a park or building a hotel. It's arrogant and condescending as well as untrue. I suppose I need to be looking over the shoulders of the architects to know whether or not I want an 11-story hotel a half block from my house. Frankus Sleek. Edgy. Infinitely flexible. On Nov 11, 2007, at 11:11 PM, Glenn wrote: But look at the point the barking cheese gang always makes in all posts. Those whom ask questions about the cronies of their gangs should shut up simply because their character is so defective and they're stupid and silly. 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.
Re: [UC] Fallacious argumentation and gang strategy
Frank, As you should be. Neither you nor I nor anyone else needs to ³run any numbers² to know we don¹t want an 11-story commercial building encroaching on our residential 3-story community. ³Running the numbers² is a ruse to distract and intimidate and disempower opponents. If Penn or anyone else laid out major bucks for that property without having a plan for what it was going to do with it after it got it, then shame on them. If it had a plan for the property at the time of acquisition that it did not share with the community or consult the community about or involve the community with, then shame on them. If Lussenhop or Penn are stuck with a property and trying to figure out how to make their numbers work, that¹s not my problem or your problem, it¹s their problem. They should have done their due diligence. It¹s not the neighborhood¹s job to figure out how to make them profitable. It¹s a ruse, a red herring, a distraction from the real issue. Kimm On 11/12/07 3:32 AM, Frank [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Absolutely true, as was the rest of your message. I am sick and tired of being told that my opinion doesn't matter because I'm not running numbers or otherwise too ignorant to understand a project, whether it's redesigning a park or building a hotel. It's arrogant and condescending as well as untrue. I suppose I need to be looking over the shoulders of the architects to know whether or not I want an 11- story hotel a half block from my house. Frankus Sleek. Edgy. Infinitely flexible. On Nov 11, 2007, at 11:11 PM, Glenn wrote: But look at the point the barking cheese gang always makes in all posts. Those whom ask questions about the cronies of their gangs should shut up simply because their character is so defective and they're stupid and silly. 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] Fallacious argumentation and gang strategy
Kimm, Fact of life: ZBA casts a fairly narrow net when evaluating neighborhood impact. My ability to complain about a proposed property use that is many blocks away from where I live or own is rather limited under the law. The Councilwoman is a shrewd politician who counts all sorts of numbers. Large numbers of riled neighbors mattrer to her. She is more interested in numbers of people who turn out in person than in numbers of people who complain on line, in my experience. You seem to be making an implicit argument that you and I are of the community whereas Tom Lussenhop and Penn are not of it. Not so! It is a fact that Lussenhop is a neighbor, just as you are. And it is a fact that Penn/Drexel/USP's economy is the engine that drives this neighborhood, for good as well as for ill. So I'll listen to Lussenhop's case and I'll listen to yours. In neighborhood policy disputes, people should avoid implying that neighbors they disagree with are somehow not real neighbors. No good comes of this approach. -- Tony West Way to go, Tony. First marginalize opponents as the “chattering class,” then point out that anyone who lives more than a half-block away has no say with the ZBA. You are on a roll. I thought you said you used to be a community organizer? So sad to see folks switch sides. Yes, numbers matter, Tony. Jannie Blackwell might look at different numbers than the ZBA does. We all know Penn and Tom Lussenhop look at very different numbers. Kimm On 11/12/07 8:34 PM, Anthony West [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Here is one case where numbers clearly do matter. If you do live a half block from this project, then you fall inside the area in which ZBA traditionally seeks to note neighborhood impact. There is a legal channel in which you can express your opposition. You don't enjoy individual veto power, and I'm not sure if ZBA cares as much what you think if you rent instead of own, but you have some degree of statutory say. If, however, you live at 44th Larchwood as I do, then your opinion is much less weighty. I still am a member of SHCA, so I have some say about what that organization says. If I lived west of 46th St., my opinion would carry almost no organizational weight, although I'd still be free to express myself to anyone who cared to listen. It's all in the numbers, Frank -- in this case, a number expressing distance. -- Tony West 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] Fallacious argumentation and gang strategy
Tony, Fact of life: ZBA casts a fairly narrow net when evaluating neighborhood impact. My ability to complain about a proposed property use that is many blocks away from where I live or own is rather limited under the law. I¹m well aware of that. My point was that the trend in your posts seems to be toward discouraging opponents, and I am questioning why you would want or be inclined to do so. While I understand that, as a resident of 49th St., the ZBA is unlikely to give any official weight to my opinion, I intend to make an effort to express it to them nonetheless, because this matters to me. It¹s important. If nothing else, I get to have my voice, if not my vote counted. Why would you deprive anyone of that? However, and I will defer to others including Karen and yourself here, I believe ZBA decisions are appealable, and I don¹t know that the appellate bodies are necessarily so limited, but zoning is not an area in which I can claim much expertise. But, as I said, there are always (well, I take that back - at least so far,) political options. You seem to be making an implicit argument that you and I are of the community whereas Tom Lussenhop and Penn are not of it. No. In fact, I reconsidered some of the wording of my post given that Lussenhop unfortunately lives here. And I recognize that, for both better and worse, Penn is an integral part of this community. The problem is not that I don¹t acknowledge them; it¹s that they disregard me and so many others so regularly and so arrogantly. And, the point of my post to you was that you seem so quick to do so as well. In neighborhood policy disputes, people should avoid implying that neighbors they disagree with are somehow not real neighbors. No good comes of this approach. I agree, Tony. Your ³chattering class² post suggested this exactly to me. And it is that tactic that I am objecting vociferously to. Not just by you. Kimm On 11/12/07 9:42 PM, Anthony West [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Kimm, Fact of life: ZBA casts a fairly narrow net when evaluating neighborhood impact. My ability to complain about a proposed property use that is many blocks away from where I live or own is rather limited under the law. The Councilwoman is a shrewd politician who counts all sorts of numbers. Large numbers of riled neighbors mattrer to her. She is more interested in numbers of people who turn out in person than in numbers of people who complain on line, in my experience. You seem to be making an implicit argument that you and I are of the community whereas Tom Lussenhop and Penn are not of it. Not so! It is a fact that Lussenhop is a neighbor, just as you are. And it is a fact that Penn/Drexel/USP's economy is the engine that drives this neighborhood, for good as well as for ill. So I'll listen to Lussenhop's case and I'll listen to yours. In neighborhood policy disputes, people should avoid implying that neighbors they disagree with are somehow not real neighbors. No good comes of this approach. -- Tony West Way to go, Tony. First marginalize opponents as the ³chattering class,² then point out that anyone who lives more than a half-block away has no say with the ZBA. You are on a roll. I thought you said you used to be a community organizer? So sad to see folks switch sides. Yes, numbers matter, Tony. Jannie Blackwell might look at different numbers than the ZBA does. We all know Penn and Tom Lussenhop look at very different numbers. Kimm On 11/12/07 8:34 PM, Anthony West [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Here is one case where numbers clearly do matter. If you do live a half block from this project, then you fall inside the area in which ZBA traditionally seeks to note neighborhood impact. There is a legal channel in which you can express your opposition. You don't enjoy individual veto power, and I'm not sure if ZBA cares as much what you think if you rent instead of own, but you have some degree of statutory say. If, however, you live at 44th Larchwood as I do, then your opinion is much less weighty. I still am a member of SHCA, so I have some say about what that organization says. If I lived west of 46th St., my opinion would carry almost no organizational weight, although I'd still be free to express myself to anyone who cared to listen. It's all in the numbers, Frank -- in this case, a number expressing distance. -- Tony West 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] Fallacious argumentation and gang strategy
Dear list, Here we go again. The barking cheese gang is coming back to intimidate community discussions to serve their masters. Lets consider the last posts of Lamond and West. Theyre barking loud and clear that the non-plutocrats should shut up for various reasons. Were not traffic engineers so we should shut up. Karen is a busybody from the next neighborhood, when she is questioning issues and offering opinions, but Melanis collusion in these backroom dealings while constantly resorting to the ad hominem argument is just fine Hey Mel, I live in Spruce Hill so you should get your busy body out of my neighborhoods business or are you just being a hypocrite? But look at the point the barking cheese gang always makes in all posts. Those whom ask questions about the cronies of their gangs should shut up simply because their character is so defective and they're stupid and silly. With pomposity, Lamond and West say we little people should fight through secrecy, outright lies, etc. We need to discover the secret plans of powerful corporate agendas yet when one of us common citizens tries to do it and share with the other common citizens, we get this gang harassment by a pack of assholes. And these same assholes claim that using Penn resources to set up a censored list was caused by the incivility of others instead of for the purpose of creating a safe environment for astroturfing! The posts from these clowns to intimidate and silence discussions have been the biggest cause of incivility weve seen on this list. If someone tells the jackals after repeated harassment, to go stick their noses in some corporate butt; theyre not the cause of the incivility. Again this pathetic mean-spirited gang intimidation is intended to shut up the real community activists, who genuinely attempt to serve their community honestly and with compassion for their neighbors, while intimidating the rest of you. Yes, they will treat you like West and Melani are treating Karen and I if you dare to question their authority as corporate ass kissers. In my opinion, this gang really believes they are superior to the rest of us since they have been chosen for corporate ass kissing. Certainly, no one can look at the series of posts from West and Melani and think these two ever try to engage in civil discourse. 1.Distract from the issue with whatever mean strategies they get addicted too. 2.Demand that questions are silenced by attacking questioners character. 3.Intimidate the majority of common citizens from joining in the discussion by sending the message that ganging up is what all outsiders and little people will face. Look at this asinine ideology West and Lamond are so pompously asserting to shut us up. Their corporate friends have no rules when it comes to little people. But we cannot even ask questions while their cronies lie and hide their domineering agendas and plans. We catch them trying to jam this hotel through, which by the way, is exactly what the Penn gang is trying to do, and Lamond and West assert community citizens are in the wrong for not studying secret fucking plans!. Penn is already insisting that this hotel must be done fast because of a tight schedule. Penn owned the building for 3 fucking years but we citizens lose our rights to a fair process because of their tight schedule. Lamond and West are espousing the views of colonialist war lords and plutocrats. These arent the principals of citizens in representative democracies. The processes they espouse were considered un-American at one time So Im certainly not afraid to challenge Lamond or West in a civil debate about issues. But it seems they are either too fucking stupid or too addicted to their mean spirited bullying to be capable of civil discourse about issues. Any opinions? Are Lamond and West too stupid or too addicted to gang style bullying to engage in civil discourse? You will get a UCD door prize for the correct answer. Unwilling to ignore the return of barking cheese tactics, Glenn In a message dated 7/27/07 6:49:04 PM, kcassidy at asc.upenn.edu writes: the cool thing about this software is that i can pre-ban glenn! This will be heaven. But, I hope he doesn't know where you live. Melani __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com 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.
