Re: [UC] What you mean 'public', community man?
Karen and list, I have been attempting to engage in discussions with several community leaders since the late 1990's. Although I posted announcements on the list earlier, I first started disclosing serious problems here starting in 2004. I offer my opinion to you based on my 4 years experience on this list and my prior personal experience. To continue attempts to engage individuals, whom refuse to engage with anything other than mean spirited tricks to either obfuscate or intimidate real discussions; you engage an exercise in futility. In recent years we've seen listserv ganging-up. We've seen power and credibility asserted on the basis of civic association status alone. And quite frankly, we've seen over the past few months the same listserv subscribers justifying censorship refuse ingenuous discourse on a continuous and regular basis. When they stayed away temporarily to promote the censorship; the civil discourse, offering opinoins, etc. on this listserv improved tremendously. Over the past 4 years, I eventually made a concentrated effort to address the destroyers of discussions using a number of strategies. I often ridiculed some of the perp's in ways in which I am personally uncomfortable. I considered not single posts; but certain community leaders constant pattern of mean spirited posts, and the overwhelming intimidation I felt was inflicted upon everyone. I think many folks do not understand my reasons, and object to my aggressive riducule. I accept that. To conclude, I want to warn you; engaging with some of these proponents of censorship for the sake of civility, (these community leaders); will prove to be an exercise in futility for you too. I believe that many silent members of our list are beginning to see the fallacious strategies employed by a number of posters and recognize their goals to be obfuscation and destruction of discussion. I believe it is important to continue to publicly analyze these powerplays by community leaders to discredit them. But I believe there to be no possibility that some of these individuals will at any time attempt to engage community discussions with genuine attempts at civil discourse. Respond as you think best, but don't feel like the 300+ subscribers don't recognize the patterns. I had sometimes felt that. My opinion and encouragement, Glenn Moyer - Original Message - From: KAREN ALLEN To: UnivCity listserv Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2007 10:25 PM Subject: RE: [UC] What you mean 'public', community man? Lussenhop is trying to pass off appearances in the neighborhood as public meetings, despite the fact that there has been absolutely no attempt by him, his friends or his apologists to reach the average UC resident who does not happen to belong to the Historical Society, SHCA or any of the entities who show up at First Thursday or the Friends of 40th Street. Those organizations reach a small percentage of UC residents, and all UC residents, and not just the members of those groups, have a right to be informed and to be heard. I am not parsing words as you seem to be doing. Is SHCA or this list public? Yes, in a narrow way. Anyone who chooses to join are part of that public that makes up these entities. They are not private. But are these entities all-inclusive? No. You still insist on calling what I wrote to be insulting nonsense when I made it very clear what I meant by public and why what Lussenhop is doing is not going to pass muster in front of the Zoning Board if he tries to palm his appearances off as being public meetings. I'm not going to convince you otherwise, and I'm not going to change my opinion. And if Lussenhop appears before the Zoning Board and tries to claim those appearances qualify as public meetings, I'm going to see to it that that claim is challenged. You will note that in my reaction to your insults that I did not ask for an apology. I don't ask for apologies because a bell cannot be unrung. I also regard an apology accompanied with excuses and more insults to not be an apology, but further insults. And for the record, you do not get to define for me the standard by which I consider what is pointless, insulting nonsense, and what is out of character. You seem to think that your opinons are Truth Inviolate, and woe unto anyone who has the temerity to disagree with you. If you don't agree with me, fine. But you don't get to deem my opinion pointless out of character insulting nonsense simply because I committed the cardinal sin of disagreeing with you. And you also do not get to define me. You have decided what my character should be, and now you think that I have violated your standards of what you think my character should be. You now have to remind me what my place is, and how you expect that I won't violate your standards again. You do not define me, or what my opinon
Re: [UC] What you mean 'public', community man?
Anthony West wrote: Since there will never be any proposed hotel without such community meetings -- what's your rush? [] Personally, I don't care. Somebody will schedule these meetings eventually. When they happen, they'll happen. In the meantime, all factions should get their ducks in line and the rest of us should continue to study the issue. in the meantime lussenhop co. should stop testifying to historic commissions and architecture committees and local newspapers that open public meetings have taken place, that neighbors have been listened to. what's the rush? .. UNIVERSITY*CITOYEN [aka laserbeam®] [aka ray] SERIAL LIAR. CALL FOR RATES. It is very clear on this listserve who these people are. Ray has admitted being connected to this forger. -- Tony West Ray's falsehoods are more sophisticated, more believable -- Tony West __ This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System. For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email __ 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] What you mean 'public', community man?
- Original Message - From: Brian Siano [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: UnivCity listserv univcity@list.purple.com Sent: Tuesday, November 19, 2002 6:05 PM Subject: Re: [UC] What you mean 'public', community man? KAREN ALLEN wrote: Tony, DO NOT CURSE AT ME I did not curse at you, and I will not tolerate you cursing at me. In other circumstances, I'd be sympathetic to your complaint. And please recall that several people here-- need I name names?-- regularly insult the UC Neighbors list because it was set up to be a more civil, friendlier place. You caught me Siano; I'm impressed. Those sagacious eyes caught me regularly insulting the friendly censored Penn list. I probably shouldn't because bullies and astroturfers incapable of civil discourse need protected sanctuaries from which to spew venom on the public discussions. Say hi to the gang for me. With pity, Your former leader PS. Please name the other several names. We wouldn't want to intimidate anyone would we? And pass those names on to my buddies, Cassidy and Melani and the UCD undercover police. In other words, you're demanding Tony follow a kind of civility that you don't demand from others, and on a mailing list where people seem to pride themselves on not being censored. You haven't minded it when other people (including Tony) are cursed at. And you're on a list where asking for Special Treatment is _clearly_ not respected. So I'm not impressed by this. 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. -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.503 / Virus Database: 269.16.0/1139 - Release Date: 11/19/2007 12:35 PM 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] What you mean 'public', community man?
I don't care how other people on this list talk to each other. I do not curse at people. And I will not tolerate anyone cursing at me. Period. Date: Tue, 19 Nov 2002 18:05:43 -0500 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [UC] What you mean 'public', community man? CC: univcity@list.purple.com KAREN ALLEN wrote:Tony, DO NOT CURSE AT MEI did not curse at you, and I will not tolerate you cursing at me. In other circumstances, I'd be sympathetic to your complaint. But remember, this is a list where cursing has happened in the past, where people other than Tony regularly insult others (a recent assholes' shot seems to have escaped your notice). And please recall that several people here-- need I name names?-- regularly insult the UC Neighbors list because it was set up to be a more civil, friendlier place. In other words, you're demanding Tony follow a kind of civility that you don't demand from others, and on a mailing list where people seem to pride themselves on not being censored. You haven't minded it when other people (including Tony) are cursed at. And you're on a list where asking for Special Treatment is _clearly_ not respected. So I'm not impressed by this. 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] What you mean 'public', community man?
Lussenhop is trying to pass off appearances in the neighborhood as public meetings, despite the fact that there has been absolutely no attempt by him, his friends or his apologists to reach the average UC resident who does not happen to belong to the Historical Society, SHCA or any of the entities who show up at First Thursday or the Friends of 40th Street. Those organizations reach a small percentage of UC residents, and all UC residents, and not just the members of those groups, have a right to be informed and to be heard. I am not parsing words as you seem to be doing. Is SHCA or this list public? Yes, in a narrow way. Anyone who chooses to join are part of that public that makes up these entities. They are not private. But are these entities all-inclusive? No. You still insist on calling what I wrote to be insulting nonsense when I made it very clear what I meant by public and why what Lussenhop is doing is not going to pass muster in front of the Zoning Board if he tries to palm his appearances off as being public meetings. I'm not going to convince you otherwise, and I'm not going to change my opinion. And if Lussenhop appears before the Zoning Board and tries to claim those appearances qualify as public meetings, I'm going to see to it that that claim is challenged. You will note that in my reaction to your insults that I did not ask for an apology. I don't ask for apologies because a bell cannot be unrung. I also regard an apology accompanied with excuses and more insults to not be an apology, but further insults. And for the record, you do not get to define for me the standard by which I consider what is pointless, insulting nonsense, and what is out of character. You seem to think that your opinons are Truth Inviolate, and woe unto anyone who has the temerity to disagree with you. If you don't agree with me, fine. But you don't get to deem my opinion pointless out of character insulting nonsense simply because I committed the cardinal sin of disagreeing with you. And you also do not get to define me. You have decided what my character should be, and now you think that I have violated your standards of what you think my character should be. You now have to remind me what my place is, and how you expect that I won't violate your standards again. You do not define me, or what my opinon is or should be. You are very arrogant, sir, and you really need to do something about that. Karen Allen Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2007 19:58:03 -0500 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: UnivCity@list.purple.com Subject: Re: [UC] What you mean 'public', community man? I actually agree with Liz, and with Karen as well. I do not like printed vulgarity and I try to avoid it myself. It was late at night and I must have been influenced by Frank who, a few hours earlier, had let fly exactly the same epithet at me, I notice. But it is my fault that I allowed myself to be influenced, not Frank's that he influenced me. I do apologize to you, Karen for such pointless language. You did indeed write insulting nonsense, which did deserve to be pointed out. You don't usually, and I bet I won't often see you do so again. It's out of character for you Furthermore, I never left the list. Where did you get that idea? The list stopped accepting my posts, as it did those of several other people. Now it seems to be working again. Thank you, whoever helped fix it! -- Tony West Why the stretch? Karen was speaking for herself. I find it refreshing that she did not pretend to speak for others who may (or not) be offended by bad language. She did not drag other 'guilty' parties in. She did not adopt the mantle of List Police. I find Karen's posts to be specific and informative. Best! LizOn Tue, 19 Nov 2002 18:05:43 -0500 Brian Siano [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: KAREN ALLEN wrote: Tony, DO NOT CURSE AT ME I did not curse at you, and I will not tolerate you cursing at me. In other circumstances, I'd be sympathetic to your complaint. But remember, this is a list where cursing has happened in the past, where people other than Tony regularly insult others (a recent assholes' shot seems to have escaped your notice). And please recall that several people here-- need I name names?-- regularly insult the UC Neighbors list because it was set up to be a more civil, friendlier place. In other words, you're demanding Tony follow a kind of civility that you don't demand from others, and on a mailing list where people seem topride themselves on not being censored. You haven't minded it whenother people (including Tony) are cursed at. And you're on a list where asking for Special Treatment is _clearly_ not respected. So I'm not impressed by this. You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the list named UnivCity. To unsubscribe
RE: [UC] What you mean 'public', community man?
Tony, DO NOT CURSE AT ME I did not curse at you, and I will not tolerate you cursing at me. Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2007 23:39:57 -0500 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: UnivCity@list.purple.com Subject: Re: [UC] What you mean 'public', community man? Bullshit, Karen. You know better.
RE: [UC] What you mean 'public', community man?
Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2007 23:39:57 -0500 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: UnivCity@list.purple.com Subject: Re: [UC] What you mean 'public', community man? Bullshit, Karen. You know better. Tony, I seem to recall you saying that you left this list because it was uncivil. Yet, you're back here cursing at me because you disagree with me. Or apparantly because I disagree with you. Please show me where in any of MY (not anyone else's) discourse did I curse at you or show you any similar disrespect. Or is the act of disagreeing with you in itself being disrespectful? I don't care how you or anyone else on the list talk to each other. I personally do not curse at people, and I will not tolerate being cursed at. Ever. I am not going to be bullied with profanity, and I am not intimidated by verbosity. I urge that we all write, all the time, as if we are writing in public -- and read as if we are reading in private. This from someone who just cursed at me out of the blue. BTW: I stand by what I said. Those were not public meetings because the proper notice did not go out, and people outside the target audience of members did not have an opportunity to attend. Even SHCA President Cindy Roberts admitted that the Spruce Hill meeting was not public when Chris O'Donnell challenged it on that basis. Lussenhop cannot go before any Zoning or any other official body that requires public meetings and claim that these meetings satisfied that requirement. And cursing at me won't change that. I am a tolerant man. Every public communication medium should be respected, in my view; just cut it the slack that it needs.Why are you so hostile to other forms of public communication? Let's everybody get away from this internet rage What??? I don't even know what you're talking about. As far as hostility is concerned, you're the one bringing that subject up, and you're the one cursing, so who's hostile? Karen Allen Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2007 23:39:57 -0500 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: UnivCity@list.purple.com Subject: Re: [UC] What you mean 'public', community man? Bullshit, Karen. You know better. Lussenhop didn't run either of these meetings and I never said he did. Other people ran them: Glenn Bryan at 1st Thursday and Cindy Roberts at SHCA. Lussenhop showed up, disseminated information and answered questions at them. This is a sin? These meetings were not public in the sense that they met the standards for ZBA public meetings. But Lussenhop never claimed they did. They were public in exactly the same sense the UC-list publications we are now reading, are public. Well, they are and they aren't. Obviously UC-list can't be fully public because its participation is restricted to people with access to computers. Yet it is not wrong for Karen to write on UC-list. If it is not wrong for Karen to communicate on UC-list, it is not wrong for Lussenhop to communicate at 1st Thursday. You are equal neighbors and you have equal right of free public speech in any forum is available. I am a tolerant man. Every public communication medium should be respected, in my view; just cut it the slack that it needs.Why are you so hostile to other forms of public communication? Let's everybody get away from this internet rage. I urge that we all write, all the time, as if we are writing in public -- and read as if we are reading in private. -- Tony WestKAREN ALLEN wrote: Tony,If you are willilng to bear witness that Lussenhop ran open and public meetings, I will bear witness that that is totally untrue. He spoke in front of a membership organization's election meeting, which was advertised only to the members, not to anyone who was not a member, and Lussenhop's presentation was not even on the agenda. Even members were excluded if they chose not to attend the meeting because they were not interested in what was stated on the agenda.Lussenhop spoke to those who happened to be present, or who had heard by other means that he was going to speak. I knew to show up because the project archetect told the HC that Lussenhop was going to a public meeting the following Tuesday.Spruce Hill did not extend the opportunity to all interested parties to hear his presentation. That is not public. 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] What you mean 'public', community man?
Tony West wrote: Bullshit, Karen. You know better. KAREN ALLEN wrote: Tony, I seem to recall you saying that you left this list because it was uncivil. Yet, you're back here cursing at me because you disagree with me. Or apparantly because I disagree with you. KAREN, YOU IGNORANT SLUT. remember that line? coincidentally, this month's daedalus has an article by amy gutmann called the lure dangers of extremist rhetoric. it begins: In a democracy, controversy is healthy. Complex issues as far-ranging as immigration, health care, military interventions, taxation, and education seldom lend themselves to simple, consensual solutions. The public interest is well served by robust public argument. But when disagreements are so driven and distorted by extremist rhetoric that citizens and public officials fail to engage with one another reasonably or respectfully on substantive issues of public importance, the debate degenerates, blocking constructive compromises that would benefit all sides more than the status quo would. Like many scholars, American citizens today discern a link between the impoverished, divisive discourse that pollutes our politics and culture, and the diminished capacity of America's political system to address intelligently, let alone solve, our most challenging problems--from health care to global warming, from public education to Social Security, from terrorism to this country's eroding competitive advantage in the global economy. To help us understand the nature of this link between extremist rhetoric and political paralysis, let us begin with an example of extremist rhetoric in entertainment, where it is even more common and far less controversial than in politics. Many Americans over the age of forty may remember the weekly Point/Counterpoint segment from 60 Minutes, which pitted the liberal Shana Alexander against the conservative James J. Kilpatrick. Even more will recall the spoof of Point/Counterpoint from Saturday Night Live, where Dan Ackroyd resorted to a show of verbal pyrotechnics as he drove a single point to the ground, while effacing Jane Curtin as an ignorant slut. Jane and Dan were clearly not out either to advance the public interest or to respect one another. Nor should they have been. SNL is, as they say, entertainment. And when extremist rhetoric is intentionally outlandish, it makes for great entertainment. But when it is politically for real, extremist rhetoric has far less benign effects on democratic discourse: it demeans opponents, radically narrows understanding of the issue at hand, and closes off compromise. As we have seen all too vividly, extremist rhetoric has become par for the course of democratic controversy in America. It dominates cable tv news. (Talk radio is even more extreme.) The public issues discussed are complex and important, but little light is shed on them. The entertainment is that of a wrestling match, with far less demonstrable skill. Serious extremist rhetoric has two defining features. First, it tends toward single-mindedness on any given issue. Second, it passionately expresses certainty about the supremacy of its perspective on the issue without submitting itself either to a reasonable test of truth or to a reasoned public debate. gutmann concludes: Democracy's saving grace is that most citizens are put off by demagogues and their techniques. By recognizing that the person with whom we disagree, far from being an ignorant slut, typically has a valid point worth considering, we can work together as fellow citizens who respectfully disagree with one another to give our great constitutional democracy a longer lease on life. http://www.mitpressjournals.org/toc/daed/136/4 .. UNIVERSITY*CITOYEN [aka laserbeam®] [aka ray] SERIAL LIAR. CALL FOR RATES. It is very clear on this listserve who these people are. Ray has admitted being connected to this forger. -- Tony West Ray's falsehoods are more sophisticated, more believable -- Tony West __ This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System. For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email __ 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] What you mean 'public', community man?
KAREN ALLEN wrote: Tony, DO NOT CURSE AT ME I did not curse at you, and I will not tolerate you cursing at me. In other circumstances, I'd be sympathetic to your complaint. But remember, this is a list where cursing has happened in the past, where people other than Tony regularly insult others (a recent assholes' shot seems to have escaped your notice). And please recall that several people here-- need I name names?-- regularly insult the UC Neighbors list because it was set up to be a more civil, friendlier place. In other words, you're demanding Tony follow a kind of civility that you don't demand from others, and on a mailing list where people seem to pride themselves on not being censored. You haven't minded it when other people (including Tony) are cursed at. And you're on a list where asking for Special Treatment is _clearly_ not respected. So I'm not impressed by this. 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] What you mean 'public', community man?
Why the stretch? Karen was speaking for herself. I find it refreshing that she did not pretend to speak for others who may (or not) be offended by bad language. She did not drag other 'guilty' parties in. She did not adopt the mantle of List Police. I find Karen's posts to be specific and informative. Best! Liz On Tue, 19 Nov 2002 18:05:43 -0500 Brian Siano [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: KAREN ALLEN wrote: Tony, DO NOT CURSE AT ME I did not curse at you, and I will not tolerate you cursing at me. In other circumstances, I'd be sympathetic to your complaint. But remember, this is a list where cursing has happened in the past, where people other than Tony regularly insult others (a recent assholes' shot seems to have escaped your notice). And please recall that several people here-- need I name names?-- regularly insult the UC Neighbors list because it was set up to be a more civil, friendlier place. In other words, you're demanding Tony follow a kind of civility that you don't demand from others, and on a mailing list where people seem to pride themselves on not being censored. You haven't minded it when other people (including Tony) are cursed at. And you're on a list where asking for Special Treatment is _clearly_ not respected. So I'm not impressed by this. 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. Elizabeth Campion Cell Phone: 215-880-2930 215-546-0550 Main, -546-9871 fax, Desk + VM: 215-790-5653 PRUDENTIAL, FOX ROACH REALTORS, LLC Please read Consumer Notice enjoy HOME PILOT tools at www.PruFoxRoach.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.
Re: [UC] What you mean 'public', community man?
I actually agree with Liz, and with Karen as well. I do not like printed vulgarity and I try to avoid it myself. It was late at night and I must have been influenced by Frank who, a few hours earlier, had let fly exactly the same epithet at me, I notice. But it is my fault that I allowed myself to be influenced, not Frank's that he influenced me. I do apologize to you, Karen for such pointless language. You did indeed write insulting nonsense, which did deserve to be pointed out. You don't usually, and I bet I won't often see you do so again. It's out of character for you Furthermore, I never left the list. Where did you get that idea? The list stopped accepting my posts, as it did those of several other people. Now it seems to be working again. Thank you, whoever helped fix it! -- Tony West Why the stretch? Karen was speaking for herself. I find it refreshing that she did not pretend to speak for others who may (or not) be offended by bad language. She did not drag other 'guilty' parties in. She did not adopt the mantle of List Police. I find Karen's posts to be specific and informative. Best! Liz On Tue, 19 Nov 2002 18:05:43 -0500 Brian Siano [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: KAREN ALLEN wrote: Tony, DO NOT CURSE AT ME I did not curse at you, and I will not tolerate you cursing at me. In other circumstances, I'd be sympathetic to your complaint. But remember, this is a list where cursing has happened in the past, where people other than Tony regularly insult others (a recent assholes' shot seems to have escaped your notice). And please recall that several people here-- need I name names?-- regularly insult the UC Neighbors list because it was set up to be a more civil, friendlier place. In other words, you're demanding Tony follow a kind of civility that you don't demand from others, and on a mailing list where people seem to pride themselves on not being censored. You haven't minded it when other people (including Tony) are cursed at. And you're on a list where asking for Special Treatment is _clearly_ not respected. So I'm not impressed by this. 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. Elizabeth Campion Cell Phone: 215-880-2930 215-546-0550 Main, -546-9871 fax, Desk + VM: 215-790-5653 PRUDENTIAL, FOX ROACH REALTORS, LLC Please read Consumer Notice enjoy HOME PILOT tools at www.PruFoxRoach.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. 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] What you mean 'public', community man? - Gimme uh break
-Original Message- From: Anthony West [EMAIL PROTECTED] ... You did indeed write insulting nonsense,?... ? ... I never left the list.?... The list stopped accepting my posts,... Meaningful apology (?), when you try to catch Counselor Allen with a deftless backhand. ? The list was much more peaceful, during your absence, while your re-emergence?has been: (fill in any number of left-handed comments), Euclid Jr. When a free list stops accepting the posts of the managing-editor of?our local leading political intelligencer, you Tony?should engage either with charm or dollars a?local great IT maven to remedy your deficit, be it hardware or software based; I'm currently ruling out mental illness?as the basis. It does not escape some of us how?sophisticated software and computer networks turn thought into print. That is what the Tayouns have been doing with the Philly Record weekly for quite a few years. On a list where so many members are helpful and considerate of total strangers, you may want to humbly look inward as to why no one stepped up to freely help you address your cyber limitations. Apparently, you don't find this list important enough to have paid your paper's CTO or other quality techno-dude/dudette?to resolve your failures-to-post to this great?list. Peace be with you, soon. Craig As to your inability to post -Original Message- From: Anthony West [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: UnivCity listserv UnivCity@list.purple.com Sent: Mon, 19 Nov 2007 7:58 pm Subject: Re: [UC] What you mean 'public', community man? I actually agree with Liz, and with Karen as well. I do not like printed vulgarity and I try to avoid it myself. It was late at night and I must have been influenced by Frank who, a few hours earlier, had let fly exactly the same epithet at me, I notice. But it is my fault that I allowed myself to be influenced, not Frank's that he influenced me.? ? I do apologize to you, Karen for such pointless language. You did indeed write insulting nonsense, which did deserve to be pointed out. You don't usually, and I bet I won't often see you do so again. It's out of character for you? ? Furthermore, I never left the list. Where did you get that idea? The list stopped accepting my posts, as it did those of several other people. Now it seems to be working again. Thank you, whoever helped fix it!? ? -- Tony West? ? Why the stretch?? Karen was speaking for herself.? ? I find it refreshing that she did not pretend to speak for others who may? (or not) be offended by bad language.? ? She did not drag other 'guilty' parties in.? She did not adopt the mantle of List Police.? ? I find Karen's posts to be specific and informative.? ? Best!? Liz? ? ? On Tue, 19 Nov 2002 18:05:43 -0500 Brian Siano [EMAIL PROTECTED]? writes:? KAREN ALLEN wrote:? Tony,? DO NOT CURSE AT ME? I did not curse at you, and I will not tolerate you cursing at me. In other circumstances, I'd be sympathetic to your complaint.? ? But remember, this is a list where cursing has happened in the past, ? where people other than Tony regularly insult others (a recent assholes' shot seems to have escaped your notice). And please recall that several people here-- need I name names?-- regularly insult the UC Neighbors list because it was set up to be a more civil, friendlier place.? ? In other words, you're demanding Tony follow a kind of civility that you don't demand from others, and on a mailing list where people seem to ? pride themselves on not being censored. You haven't minded it when ? other people (including Tony) are cursed at. And you're on a list where asking for Special Treatment is _clearly_ not respected.? ? So I'm not impressed by this.? ? ? ? ? ? ? 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.? ? ? ? ? Elizabeth Campion Cell Phone: 215-880-2930? 215-546-0550 Main, -546-9871 fax, Desk + VM: 215-790-5653? PRUDENTIAL, FOX ROACH REALTORS, LLC? Please read Consumer Notice enjoy HOME PILOT tools at? www.PruFoxRoach.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.? ? ? ? ? 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] What you mean 'public', community man? - Gimme uh break
Craig, I have to say that while I often value your posts and always look forward to reading them, nothing you just wrote makes much sense. I apologized once for imitating other people's rude language. But Karen was wrong on a more important point of substance and you know it. You don't aid civility by beating this dead horse. Other people did ultimately fix some of UC-list's problems, which had stopped it from being a public forum in any meaningful sense. They did so because I complained. This was my public service to those who like to use UC-list to orate about public this and public that, because I want this public forum not to be pure baloney. Because I value your words at their best (even if not tonight), I value this forum at all times, for all people. -- Tony West Meaningful apology (?), when you try to catch Counselor Allen with a deftless backhand. The list was much more peaceful, during your absence, while your re-emergence has been: (fill in any number of left-handed comments), Euclid Jr. When a free list stops accepting the posts of the managing-editor of our local leading political intelligencer, you Tony should engage either with charm or dollars a local great IT maven to remedy your deficit, be it hardware or software based; I'm currently ruling out mental illness as the basis. It does not escape some of us how sophisticated software and computer networks turn thought into print. That is what the Tayouns have been doing with the Philly Record weekly for quite a few years. On a list where so many members are helpful and considerate of total strangers, you may want to humbly look inward as to why no one stepped up to freely help you address your cyber limitations. Apparently, you don't find this list important enough to have paid your paper's CTO or other quality techno-dude/dudette to resolve your failures-to-post to this great list. Peace be with you, soon. Craig As to your inability to post -Original Message- From: Anthony West [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: UnivCity listserv UnivCity@list.purple.com Sent: Mon, 19 Nov 2007 7:58 pm Subject: Re: [UC] What you mean 'public', community man? I actually agree with Liz, and with Karen as well. I do not like printed vulgarity and I try to avoid it myself. It was late at night and I must have been influenced by Frank who, a few hours earlier, had let fly exactly the same epithet at me, I notice. But it is my fault that I allowed myself to be influenced, not Frank's that he influenced me. I do apologize to you, Karen for such pointless language. You did indeed write insulting nonsense, which did deserve to be pointed out. You don't usually, and I bet I won't often see you do so again. It's out of character for you Furthermore, I never left the list. Where did you get that idea? The list stopped accepting my posts, as it did those of several other people. Now it seems to be working again. Thank you, whoever helped fix it! -- Tony West Why the stretch? Karen was speaking for herself. I find it refreshing that she did not pretend to speak for others who may (or not) be offended by bad language. She did not drag other 'guilty' parties in. She did not adopt the mantle of List Police. I find Karen's posts to be specific and informative. Best! Liz On Tue, 19 Nov 2002 18:05:43 -0500 Brian Siano [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: KAREN ALLEN wrote: Tony, DO NOT CURSE AT ME I did not curse at you, and I will not tolerate you cursing at me. In other circumstances, I'd be sympathetic to your complaint. But remember, this is a list where cursing has happened in the past, where people other than Tony regularly insult others (a recent assholes' shot seems to have escaped your notice). And please recall that several people here-- need I name names?-- regularly insult the UC Neighbors list because it was set up to be a more civil, friendlier place. In other words, you're demanding Tony follow a kind of civility that you don't demand from others, and on a mailing list where people seem to pride themselves on not being censored. You haven't minded it when other people (including Tony) are cursed at. And you're on a list where asking for Special Treatment is _clearly_ not respected. So I'm not impressed by this. 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. Elizabeth Campion Cell Phone: 215-880-2930 215-546-0550 Main, -546-9871 fax, Desk + VM: 215-790-5653 PRUDENTIAL, FOX ROACH REALTORS, LLC Please read Consumer Notice enjoy HOME PILOT tools at www.PruFoxRoach.com http://www.prufoxroach.com/ You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the list named UnivCity. To unsubscribe or for archive information, see http
Re: [UC] What you mean 'public', community man?
Why do you guys (and you know who you are) have so much trouble keeping discussion non-personal, mean-spirited or calm? Cindy that is a good question. What happened to this list after the censored Penn list was set up and the founders were attempting to portray it as a good neighbors list for civil discussion ? We saw the people on this public list were able to engage in civil discourse, disagree with each other, etc. The difference was like night and day! The censored list was always intended to intimidate any real discussion. Go over to the Penn list and you will see that it provides a vehicle for spreading misinformation and the corporate agenda in a protected censored environment. This hotel is the first major test of the difference between the discussions. Where are people getting facts, putting together pieces on the issue, and discussing this process openly and honestly? Where do people come when they want a real discussion? Cindy, this list has emerged as one of the most important forums for discussion of issues in our community! Now, what is the message when those from the protected censored list come to our public discussion? We've been through this before. It is not just the personal attacks but a whole series of fallacious argumentative techniques with one purpose. Shut up, shut up, shut up is the message! Those whom want to engage in secret dealings want the rest of the busy bodies and ranters to shut up and will resort to all of the old tactics. I believe you see me fighting back without a great deal of patience with people who have been calling me names for years. It too looks hostile and I am hostile towards them. I wouldn't expect you to remember how I tried to continue for a long time with discussions to the reasonable people while I was bombarded by attacks, insults, wishes for my death, etc. As I was unwilling to be intimidated, I would be bombarded by this stuff from these characters who always engage with these tactics. We had a discussion about the free pass that seemed to be given and started exposing tactics like the ad hominem, straw man, and red-herring. When that happened the censored list was created. I always assumed that the free pass given to Melani, West, Van Helder, and Cassidy was because the majority of subscribers were intimidated by them and didn't want the same treatment as i received. Now, what are we seeing after this hotel project was outed on this list while the Penn crap was reported in the safety of a censored list? A censored list which was created with the promise of intimidating real discussion? The same cast of characters has come back to the public list with all of the same tricks and personal attacks all designed to destroy or distract the civil discourse. Cindy, if you and others on this list demand that these characters stop when they first start this stuff, I will promise you and the list not to return it to them in equal or greater portions to what they dish out. But when this started again, it just continues and there was not a loud condemnation. If we don't demand that it stops immediately, it not only seriously distracts from the real community discussion, but intimidates all of our fellow subscribers whom are intimidated from expressing their views. People don't want to be called disinterested in the community because they are out of town like Frank. Or called a busybody like Melani did to Karen, and I don't like being called supertroll speaking trogglish by a gang who never ever attempts civil discourse about issues. Thanks for standing up to this, because I don't think any of us want to return to the slinging of crap that we had before the attempt to set up a good neighbors list. When you and others stand up when these clowns start with supertroll comments against individuals engaged with important discussions, the target of the attack does not have to fight back and turn the clock back. You will have my cooperation for now if others stand up too. But I won't keep trying to correct misinformation and wasting time if these clowns persist. They will get one chance and if I then need to call them liars, etc.; I will do so, but I will offer support for why the particular name is appropriate! Thanks again for raising the issue. Sincerely, Glenn - Original Message - From: Cindy Miller To: univcity@list.purple.com Sent: Friday, November 16, 2007 8:48 AM Subject: Re: [UC] What you mean 'public', community man? Really.apologies to Frank. Why do you guys (and you know who you are) have so much trouble keeping discussion non-personal, mean-spirited or calm? I DO have interest in staying informed about this hotel issue, I like to read the various debates, and back-and-forth--but I'm getting ready to start with the Delete key again! Melon Melani ...Super-trollliars Ugh...chill! -cm `·.¸¸.·´¯`·.¸.·´¯`·...¸º
Re: [UC] What you mean 'public', community man?
Correct me if I'm wrong but didn't he also tell
the DP that he had already participated in open and public meetings on
this project?
Frank,
Let me confirm. Anything you get from UCD operatives will likely be
unmitigated bullshit!
The Penn team has twice told city officials in public testimony that the
Spruce Hill Zoning committee held open and public forums. Melani, Andrew,
Karen, Lew and I from the list were present when this was first done Oct.
23. Also present were Barry Grossbach of that zoning committee and Chris
O'Donnell. I immediately sent an e-mail, Oct. 26, to SHCA for information
about these reported forums and posted that letter to the list. I NEVER GOT
A RESPONSE.
At the Nov 9, full commission meeting the Penn team added the lie that
another public meeting was planned for this week for the Spruce Hill
neighborhood. We know now that this trick with SHCA was at the center of
that lie. Mike Hardy, Lindsay Johnston, Dan Deritis, Melani, Karen, Mary G
and I were present.
Because we have an active public list, several of us put information
together over the holiday weekend and discovered that SHCA was absolutely in
collusion by planning this without any notification to the public. SHCA
could have notified the public and its members after the Oct 23 astroturfing
was confirmed and before the Nov 13 attempt to give the Penn team cover.
There is no mistake with the dates here.
The fact that West is trying to spin the SHCA trickery as a great public
meeting is to be expected. He is on two UCD committees. Melani and
Lussenhop are also representing the community on UCD committees.
The thing about these lies is that we can rule out a mistake by any
newspaper reporter too. The lies were recorded testimony. While we
couldn't be at the SHCA collaboration supporting these lies, it sounds as
though Chris O'Donnell, who witnessed the lies Oct 23 by the Penn team, and
perhaps others present made sure that SHCA was confronted and confirmed
publicly, Tues was NOT a public meeting.
SHCA tried so hard to keep silent about this that they did not even disclose
Lussenhop's scheduled Tuesday appearance to their own members!! Again there
is no mistake because Barry Grossbach of SHCA was present when the false
testimony was first given Oct. 23. I assume he heard me tell the committee
then that these claims were false. As far as I am concerned, there is no
longer a question whether SHCA was used by Penn or is a full partner in
covering these lies to be used as evidence of false community engagement.
We are now in the phase when members of the barking cheese gang will come to
our list and call me and others liars. I and others will be nut cases
ranting about the hard volunteer work of SHCA which no one wants to hear.
Melani started immediately with her, no one wants to hear from the busy
bodies routine. And the great intellectual West (the bullshit King) is
supporting that Penn presented gobs of information like they had for 17
public meetings about the UCD policy for Clark Park.
You, I and all other little people have a duty to give SHCA $20, watch daily
for all their meetings at the last minute, and be willing to cancel all
plans at the last minute if we discover trickery. We are supposed to accept
that it is our duty to catch them when it all boils down to simple
notification. I don't know if you remember that Tony's hard working FOCP
volunteers were repeatedly too stupid to announce meetings about a complete
redesign of the park last fall! This was to be ignored and what became the
barking cheese gang focused on my unwanted uncivil ranting that no one
wanted to hear. The pattern is always the same.
If the public had found out about the Tues scheme, SHCA would have
rescheduled their meeting for Lussenhop. The no show at Friends of 40th was
an example of an announced meeting being avoided. (It is the only meeting
that was ever announced in the UC Review so Lussenhop didn't show.) {When I
was on the Quality of Life Task Force, I was out of the state when I was
found guilty, a new policy was established, and the Task force was ended!
Outgoing SHCA President Cindy Roberts happened to be involved with that
leading that task force in 2001-2002.}
I wonder how long the public is going to continue to allow this pattern to
continue? Have Penn and the civic association leaders become so bold
because the people are afraid of Penn and barking cheese intimidation? How
can we allow this to continue without standing together as a community?
Take care,
Glenn
- Original Message -
From: Frank [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: UnivCity@list.purple.com
Sent: Thursday, November 15, 2007 11:01 PM
Subject: Re: [UC] What you mean 'public', community man?
And we all know he did exactly the opposite when he tried to get the
property de-listed. Correct me if I'm wrong but didn't he also tell the
DP that he had already participated in open
Re: [UC] What you mean 'public', community man?
Really.apologies to Frank. Why do you guys (and you know who you are) have so much trouble keeping discussion non-personal, mean-spirited or calm? I DO have interest in staying informed about this hotel issue, I like to read the various debates, and back-and-forth--but I'm getting ready to start with the Delete key again! Melon Melani ...Super-trollliars Ugh...chill! -cm `·.¸¸.·´¯`·.¸.·´¯`·...¸º On Nov 16, 2007, at 1:35 AM, Frank wrote: Tony, This is the last message I will ever address to you. I don't understand why you and your group always have to make these things personal. I am in Atlanta staying again with a good friend who is having chemotherapy over the course of 4 months. That is more important to me right now than any neighborhood issue. How dare you use that as the basis of a snide comment. It's despicable. The rest of your message is unmitigated bullshit. Frank On Nov 15, 2007, at 11:25 PM, Anthony West wrote: I have no idea what he told the DP, which I don't have a regular chance to read. And I have deeply no idea what the difference is between what he told the DP and what the DP wrote. Writing to fit space is an unavoidable act of analysis, which no one practises perfectly. In my experience -- which we have studied on UC-list, thanks to Ray -- DP journalism is student journalism and is less reliable than most journalism when it strays off campus and attempts to grapple with adult life issues its reporters have not yet had any experience with. In any event, as we all know, open and public is a loose term that means all sorts of different things in all sorts of different contexts. Your criticism is jejune unless you can specify the context. The back bar at Dahlak is properly described as open and public in certain contexts, but not in others. I bear witness that Lussenhop has participated in open and public meetings. I have no idea if these meetings, or any others, meet HC standards for open and public, or even if HC has any standards for its deliberations. All I can say is, he's out there. He's not in Atlanta all the time. -- Tony West And we all know he did exactly the opposite when he tried to get the property de-listed. Correct me if I'm wrong but didn't he also tell the DP that he had already participated in open and public meetings on this project? Frankus Sleek. Edgy. Infinitely flexible. 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] What you mean 'public', community man?
Frank, I am terribly sorry your friend is so ill. This must be a terribly painful time for you. -- Tony West Tony, This is the last message I will ever address to you. I don't understand why you and your group always have to make these things personal. I am in Atlanta staying again with a good friend who is having chemotherapy over the course of 4 months. That is more important to me right now than any neighborhood issue. How dare you use that as the basis of a snide comment. It's despicable. The rest of your message is unmitigated bullshit. 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] What you mean 'public', community man?
Glenn's statement I false. I sit on no UCD committees and never have. -- Tony West . The fact that West is trying to spin the SHCA trickery as a great public meeting is to be expected. He is on two UCD committees. 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] What you mean 'public', community man?
Tony, If you are willilng to bear witness that Lussenhop ran open and public meetings, I will bear witness that that is totally untrue. He spoke in front of a membership organization's election meeting, which was advertised only to the members, not to anyone who was not a member, and Lussenhop's presentation was not even on the agenda. Even members were excluded if they chose not to attend the meeting because they were not interested in what was stated on the agenda. Lussenhop spoke to those who happened to be present, or who had heard by other means that he was going to speak. I knew to show up because the project archetect told the HC that Lussenhop was going to a public meeting the following Tuesday. Spruce Hill did not extend the opportunity to all interested parties to hear his presentation. That is not public. From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [UC] What you mean 'public', community man? Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2007 01:35:39 -0500 To: UnivCity@list.purple.com Tony, This is the last message I will ever address to you. I don't understand why you and your group always have to make these things personal. I am in Atlanta staying again with a good friend who is having chemotherapy over the course of 4 months. That is more important to me right now than any neighborhood issue. How dare you use that as the basis of a snide comment. It's despicable. The rest of your message is unmitigated bullshit. Frank On Nov 15, 2007, at 11:25 PM, Anthony West wrote: I have no idea what he told the DP, which I don't have a regular chance to read. And I have deeply no idea what the difference is between what he told the DP and what the DP wrote. Writing to fit space is an unavoidable act of analysis, which no one practises perfectly. In my experience -- which we have studied on UC-list, thanks to Ray -- DP journalism is student journalism and is less reliable than most journalism when it strays off campus and attempts to grapple with adult life issues its reporters have not yet had any experience with. In any event, as we all know, open and public is a loose term that means all sorts of different things in all sorts of different contexts. Your criticism is jejune unless you can specify the context. The back bar at Dahlak is properly described as open and public in certain contexts, but not in others. I bear witness that Lussenhop has participated in open and public meetings. I have no idea if these meetings, or any others, meet HC standards for open and public, or even if HC has any standards for its deliberations. All I can say is, he's out there. He's not in Atlanta all the time. -- Tony WestAnd we all know he did exactly the opposite when he tried to get the property de-listed. Correct me if I'm wrong but didn't he also tell the DP that he had already participated in open and public meetings on this project? Frankus Sleek. Edgy. Infinitely flexible. 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] What you mean 'public', community man?
KAREN ALLEN wrote: Tony, That is not public. exactly. there have been no real efforts here to have a public community-wide meeting about this proposed hotel. lussenhop's 'appearances' thus far (once at an 8 am first thursday meeting where melani said he didn't have much time, once at an 8 am meeting at the old folks room on market st. where there was confusion about the date, once at an shca election meeting where it wasn't announced to the members, wasn't on the agenda) -- each of tom's 3 presentations have been conducted 'under the radar', as though he's somehow embarrassed or bored or inconvenienced by his project, not at all like a developer who's enthusiastic or impassioned about informing as many neighbors as he can about his 11-story hotel at 40th and pine yet lussenhop and his suits have told the architecture committee (oct 23) that they'd already had 2 open and public forums (as glenn and andy witnessed), and lussenhop co. reiterated that claim at the philly historic commission hearing on nov 9. moreover, lussenhop's behind-the-scenes attempt to delist the property, his private invitations to selected individuals for cups of coffee, and his non-public participation on this list have been anything but open and public. isn't it time we gave tom your friendly neighborhood developer the public stage he so obviously seeks and deserves? why doesn't tony west organize a public meeting? I'd help him publicize it. someone else could bring the mini-muffins. brian siano could videotape it. - - - - - anyway, for those still playing at home, here's the timeline so far (corrections welcome): WED OCT 10 | UC REVIEW'S FIRST PUBLIC ARTICLE ABOUT HOTEL. it's revealed that lussenhop has tried to get the mansion delisted earlier in the summer but was overruled by phc july 13. lussenhop says 'I wanted to get it de-listed to have greater choices, but once I realized the sentiment of the historical committee and neighborhood, I said 'fine, I'll work around it.' in that same article, barry grossbach says the shca zoning committee has met with lussenhop, but that no (public) zoning application has been made -- ie, no public discussion of zoning has taken place. additionally, there has been no mention of this hotel project in penn's dp, nor on ucd's website/publications, even though penn and ucd are (publicly) invested in developing 40th street. WED OCT 23 | THE ARCHITECT COMMITTEE HEARING. lussenhop's men testify that '2 open public forums' have taken place (glenn and andy witness this and report this onlist, and no one onlist who was also at that hearing denies it). the architect committee rules against the hotel proposal 4 to 2. that decision is to be forwarded to the philly historic commisssion's hearing, scheduled nov 9 FRI OCT 26 | THE OFFICIAL DATE SET BY PENN PRAXIS for lussenhop to meet with friends of 40th street (8 am). inexplicably, lussenhop is a no-show and instead meets with friends on monday oct 29 (8 am?) THUR NOV 1 | FIRST THURSDAY MEETING (8 am) at walnut st library. melani reports on kyle's list that lussenhop didn't have much time to present, there were so many other things on the agenda (It was a long First Thursday meeting, packed with agenda items, and Tom had only a few minutes to make his presentation.) FRI NOV 9 | PHILLY HISTORIC COMMISSION HEARING phc approves hotel proposal 'in concept'. lussenhop's hotel is now 11 stories tall, without approval by architect committee. again lussenhop's men testify that lussehop has met with 'the spruce hill community', and mysteriously, TUE NOV 13 | SHCA'S ANNUAL ELECTION MEETING (7:30 pm) at shca's annual election meeting for shca members, lussenhop presents proposal to about 45 people. shca members have not been informed that the hotel will be on the agenda, and in fact, it isn't. nor has the meeting been announced in the uc review in advance, the usual practice for community association meetings. - - - - - .. UNIVERSITY*CITOYEN [aka laserbeam®] [aka ray] SERIAL LIAR. CALL FOR RATES. It is very clear on this listserve who these people are. Ray has admitted being connected to this forger. -- Tony West Ray's falsehoods are more sophisticated, more believable -- 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] What you mean 'public', community man?
Bullshit, Karen. You know better. Lussenhop didn't run either of these meetings and I never said he did. Other people ran them: Glenn Bryan at 1st Thursday and Cindy Roberts at SHCA. Lussenhop showed up, disseminated information and answered questions at them. This is a sin? These meetings were not public in the sense that they met the standards for ZBA public meetings. But Lussenhop never claimed they did. They were public in exactly the same sense the UC-list publications we are now reading, are public. Well, they are and they aren't. Obviously UC-list can't be fully public because its participation is restricted to people with access to computers. Yet it is not wrong for Karen to write on UC-list. If it is not wrong for Karen to communicate on UC-list, it is not wrong for Lussenhop to communicate at 1st Thursday. You are equal neighbors and you have equal right of free public speech in any forum is available. I am a tolerant man. Every public communication medium should be respected, in my view; just cut it the slack that it needs.Why are you so hostile to other forms of public communication? Let's everybody get away from this internet rage. I urge that we all write, all the time, as if we are writing in public -- and read as if we are reading in private. -- Tony West KAREN ALLEN wrote: Tony, If you are willilng to bear witness that Lussenhop ran open and public meetings, I will bear witness that that is totally untrue. He spoke in front of a membership organization's election meeting, which was advertised only to the members, not to anyone who was not a member, and Lussenhop's presentation was not even on the agenda. Even members were excluded if they chose not to attend the meeting because they were not interested in what was stated on the agenda. Lussenhop spoke to those who happened to be present, or who had heard by other means that he was going to speak. I knew to show up because the project archetect told the HC that Lussenhop was going to a public meeting the following Tuesday. Spruce Hill did not extend the opportunity to all interested parties to hear his presentation. That is not public. 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] What you mean 'public', community man?
That is correct, Ray. Since there will never be any proposed hotel without such community meetings -- what's your rush? Are you rushing to erect this hotel? Your internet publications sound anti-hotel for the most part -- but your paycheck looks pro-hotel. Which are we to take more seriously, your mouth or your wallet? Personally, I don't care. Somebody will schedule these meetings eventually. When they happen, they'll happen. In the meantime, all factions should get their ducks in line and the rest of us should continue to study the issue. -- Tony West UNIVERSITY*CITOYEN wrote: exactly. there have been no real efforts here to have a public community-wide meeting about this proposed hotel. isn't it time we gave tom your friendly neighborhood developer the public stage he so obviously seeks and deserves? why doesn't tony west organize a public meeting? I'd help him publicize it. someone else could bring the mini-muffins. brian siano could videotape it. 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] What you mean 'public', community man? (Was: Re: added details on the 400 S. 40th proposal)
Tony, Instead of trying to ridicule Ray, let's get to the point: The HC and Zoning require there to be public meetings. There has to be adequate notification so that everyone interested in coming knows about the meeting. Newsletters to members of an organization is not enough; there must be handbills, fliers, notices posted in public places or in the newspaper to reach the general public, not just members. Any public meeting has to be anounced enough days in advance to give everyone a reasonable opportunity to change their schedules if need be. The purpose of the meeting has to be listed clearly in the notifications and in the meeting agenda so that people know it's going to be discussed. Speaking to those who happened to be in attendance on other matters is not enough. The SHCA meeting I attended did not even have Lussenhop on the agenda. If you're claiming to have attended two public meetings with Lussenhop: how did each of those meetings satisfy the above notice requirements? Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2007 17:24:08 -0500 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: UnivCity@list.purple.com Subject: [UC] What you mean 'public', community man? (Was: Re: added details on the 400 S. 40th proposal) Ray, That depends on what you mean by public. If you mean complying with public statutes about public meetings, then HC and ZBA procedures do have requirements for certain degrees of public input. Lussenhop will have to meet these requirements, for sure; his project, like any other, needs to be made public in that manner. The community is entitled to whatever participation the law says it should get, when the law says it should get it. Or do you mean instead that Lussenhop should go beyond the statutory minimum? Probably he should. In a sense, he is already. In one month, he's shown up at two very public meetings (in the sense that anyone could have attended) which I was present at, for reasons unrelated to him. Both arenas do feel like a part of my public life. He put out gobs of info and heard lots of feedback. I fear you are creating a conundrum for yourself, based on slippery and contradictory definitions of public. If any meetings beyond the publicly required legal minimum are held, by definition no such meetings can be truly public. That's because no meeting organizer can assume public liability for all that nasty technical stuff like notification, etc. if there are in fact no public rules that govern it. Therefore all such supernumerary public meetings must have an arbitrary, ad-hoc private quality. That applies with equal force to a meeting organized by you, to fulfill a dream of critiquing the project to your heart's content, as it would to a meeting organized by Lussenhop, to fulfill a dream of not having to listen to you at all. Otherwise, any faction could just keep declaring that no community participation was real unless it led to the outcome that faction desired. I'm all for hearing more about this project, and I know many others are. I'll take advantage of any opportunity I come across to follow it. I hope the community gets ample participation. The best way to ensure that, is to encourage as many different forms of community interaction as possible, without placing unreasonable expectations on any one of them. That, to me, is public life at its best. Without a doubt, though, whenever the rubber hits the road on any multi-million-dollar project like this, the final decisions will be made by those public agents that hold the statutory authority to do so. Neither you nor I will be deputized to make it for them, Ray. They like their authority. -- Tony Westthis project needs to be made public and visible and clear -- now, with real participation from the community -- and lussenhop needs to pause, and listen, and stop fumbling his project through a half-filled stadium of half-informed onlookers. seriously. 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] What you mean 'public', community man? (Was: Re: added details on the 400 S. 40th proposal)
Anthony West wrote: Ray, That depends on what you mean by public. If you mean complying with public statutes about public meetings, then HC and ZBA procedures do have requirements for certain degrees of public input. Lussenhop will have to meet these requirements, for sure; his project, like any other, needs to be made public in that manner. The community is entitled to whatever participation the law says it should get, when the law says it should get it. Or do you mean instead that Lussenhop should go beyond the statutory minimum? Probably he should. In a sense, he is already. In one month, he's shown up at two very public meetings (in the sense that anyone could have attended) which I was present at, for reasons unrelated to him. Both arenas do feel like a part of my public life. He put out gobs of info and heard lots of feedback. I fear you are creating a conundrum for yourself, based on slippery and contradictory definitions of public. If any meetings beyond the publicly required legal minimum are held, by definition no such meetings can be truly public. That's because no meeting organizer can assume public liability for all that nasty technical stuff like notification, etc. if there are in fact no public rules that govern it. Therefore all such supernumerary public meetings must have an arbitrary, ad-hoc private quality. That applies with equal force to a meeting organized by you, to fulfill a dream of critiquing the project to your heart's content, as it would to a meeting organized by Lussenhop, to fulfill a dream of not having to listen to you at all. Otherwise, any faction could just keep declaring that no community participation was real unless it led to the outcome that faction desired. I'm all for hearing more about this project, and I know many others are. I'll take advantage of any opportunity I come across to follow it. I hope the community gets ample participation. The best way to ensure that, is to encourage as many different forms of community interaction as possible, without placing unreasonable expectations on any one of them. That, to me, is public life at its best. Without a doubt, though, whenever the rubber hits the road on any multi-million-dollar project like this, the final decisions will be made by those public agents that hold the statutory authority to do so. Neither you nor I will be deputized to make it for them, Ray. They like their authority. come on tony, quit your hemming and hawing and let's cut to the chase: who is going to hold a public meeting about this proposal so that it can be clearly and openly presented (as a plan, not a moving target in between gavelings from the historic commissions and architecture commitees)? a public meeting that would allow for feedback and dialog from people in the neighborhood who are there specifically because the meeting was well publicized, with the proposed hotel as the stated agenda? you know as well as cindy roberts of shca what a public meeting is. so far, all we've been watching here is poor ol' tired tom lussenhop going through the perfunctory motions of clicking on washed-out slides of a 10-story no wait 11-story hotel, to handfuls of placid neighbors who've wandered into a meeting scheduled for something else, tentatively raising no wait lowering no wait raising their hands. tony, why don't you organize a real public meeting about this project? seriously. I'll help you publicize it. someone else can bring the mini-muffins. .. UNIVERSITY*CITOYEN [aka laserbeam®] [aka ray] SERIAL LIAR. CALL FOR RATES. It is very clear on this listserve who these people are. Ray has admitted being connected to this forger. -- Tony West Ray's falsehoods are more sophisticated, more believable -- Tony West __ This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System. For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email __ 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] What you mean 'public', community man?
Karen, Evidently they did not qualify as public meetings within the sense of the law applying to ZBA hearings. Cindy Roberts said as much at the SHCA Membership Meeting. You are an attorney and a civic-association activist, so it is a waste of your time to query me, who have little background in this subject. It is your role to lay out the requirements for us in a general way. Common sense does tell us the burden falls upon the applicant for a variance to see to it such meetings occur and are statutorily compliant, otherwise he likely will not get his variance, and there go a zillion dollars of prep-work down the drain. I have witnessed other developers of large and controversial projects go beyond the statutory minimum. I have witnessed Lussenhop doing just that, by grabbing all sorts of occasions that are public in the everyday sense of the word, to begin a process of public dialog and outreach on this project. The law does not require him to communicate with the public *only* in ZBA-defined public meetings! As Al Krigman has sagely noted in the past, real-estate owners who propose dramatic changes can and should reach out to neighbors in a variety of informal ways first, instead of just holing up inside some statutory minimum process. Surely, though, non-statutory communications are up to the developer to decide. Others may suggest methods to him but they cannot impose methods on him. Common sense also suggests it would be easier to suggest non-statutory communication channels if it is done so in a way the developer perceives to be non-confrontational and fair-minded. I'm sure I don't need to tell you that, but others perhaps should ponder the point. -- Tony West Tony, Instead of trying to ridicule Ray, let's get to the point: The HC and Zoning require there to be public meetings. There has to be adequate notification so that everyone interested in coming knows about the meeting. Newsletters to members of an organization is not enough; there must be handbills, fliers, notices posted in public places or in the newspaper to reach the general public, not just members. Any public meeting has to be anounced enough days in advance to give everyone a reasonable opportunity to change their schedules if need be. The purpose of the meeting has to be listed clearly in the notifications and in the meeting agenda so that people know it's going to be discussed. Speaking to those who happened to be in attendance on other matters is not enough. The SHCA meeting I attended did not even have Lussenhop on the agenda. If you're claiming to have attended two public meetings with Lussenhop: how did each of those meetings satisfy the above notice requirements? 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] What you mean 'public', community man?
And we all know he did exactly the opposite when he tried to get the property de-listed. Correct me if I'm wrong but didn't he also tell the DP that he had already participated in open and public meetings on this project? Frankus Sleek. Edgy. Infinitely flexible. On Nov 15, 2007, at 7:23 PM, Anthony West wrote: I have witnessed other developers of large and controversial projects go beyond the statutory minimum. I have witnessed Lussenhop doing just that, by grabbing all sorts of occasions that are public in the everyday sense of the word, to begin a process of public dialog and outreach on this project. 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] What you mean 'public', community man?
I have no idea what he told the DP, which I don't have a regular chance to read. And I have deeply no idea what the difference is between what he told the DP and what the DP wrote. Writing to fit space is an unavoidable act of analysis, which no one practises perfectly. In my experience -- which we have studied on UC-list, thanks to Ray -- DP journalism is student journalism and is less reliable than most journalism when it strays off campus and attempts to grapple with adult life issues its reporters have not yet had any experience with. In any event, as we all know, open and public is a loose term that means all sorts of different things in all sorts of different contexts. Your criticism is jejune unless you can specify the context. The back bar at Dahlak is properly described as open and public in certain contexts, but not in others. I bear witness that Lussenhop has participated in open and public meetings. I have no idea if these meetings, or any others, meet HC standards for open and public, or even if HC has any standards for its deliberations. All I can say is, he's out there. He's not in Atlanta all the time. -- Tony West And we all know he did exactly the opposite when he tried to get the property de-listed. Correct me if I'm wrong but didn't he also tell the DP that he had already participated in open and public meetings on this project? Frankus Sleek. Edgy. Infinitely flexible. 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] What you mean 'public', community man?
Tony, This is the last message I will ever address to you. I don't understand why you and your group always have to make these things personal. I am in Atlanta staying again with a good friend who is having chemotherapy over the course of 4 months. That is more important to me right now than any neighborhood issue. How dare you use that as the basis of a snide comment. It's despicable. The rest of your message is unmitigated bullshit. Frank On Nov 15, 2007, at 11:25 PM, Anthony West wrote: I have no idea what he told the DP, which I don't have a regular chance to read. And I have deeply no idea what the difference is between what he told the DP and what the DP wrote. Writing to fit space is an unavoidable act of analysis, which no one practises perfectly. In my experience -- which we have studied on UC-list, thanks to Ray -- DP journalism is student journalism and is less reliable than most journalism when it strays off campus and attempts to grapple with adult life issues its reporters have not yet had any experience with. In any event, as we all know, open and public is a loose term that means all sorts of different things in all sorts of different contexts. Your criticism is jejune unless you can specify the context. The back bar at Dahlak is properly described as open and public in certain contexts, but not in others. I bear witness that Lussenhop has participated in open and public meetings. I have no idea if these meetings, or any others, meet HC standards for open and public, or even if HC has any standards for its deliberations. All I can say is, he's out there. He's not in Atlanta all the time. -- Tony West And we all know he did exactly the opposite when he tried to get the property de-listed. Correct me if I'm wrong but didn't he also tell the DP that he had already participated in open and public meetings on this project? Frankus Sleek. Edgy. Infinitely flexible. 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] What you mean 'public', community man? (Was: Re: added details on the 400 S. 40th proposal)
I fear you are creating a conundrum for yourself, based on slippery and contradictory definitions of public. If any meetings beyond the publicly required legal minimum are held, by definition no such meetings can be truly public. That's because no meeting organizer can assume public liability for all that nasty technical stuff like notification, etc. if there are in fact no public rules that govern it. Therefore all such supernumerary public meetings must have an arbitrary, ad-hoc private quality. Oh my. This is perhaps the most brilliant impressive analysis that I've ever seen from Mr. West. Thank you Tony. Thank you. This is so far beyond me that by public definition, I can only assume the conundrum that when the sun is at 1.7 % arc to southeastern sea-level shadows, that this is complete ad-hoc public notification of nonsupernumerary nonsense to me. It reminds me of that very relevant song either John Lennon or Tony's UCD committees once sang: Everybody's talking 'bout this ism, that ism, ism ism is; All we are saying; is give shit a chance. All we are saying; is give shit a chance A liar bank rolled by Penn, Glenn - Original Message - From: Anthony West [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: University City List UnivCity@list.purple.com Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2007 5:24 PM Subject: [UC] What you mean 'public', community man? (Was: Re: added details on the 400 S. 40th proposal) Ray, That depends on what you mean by public. If you mean complying with public statutes about public meetings, then HC and ZBA procedures do have requirements for certain degrees of public input. Lussenhop will have to meet these requirements, for sure; his project, like any other, needs to be made public in that manner. The community is entitled to whatever participation the law says it should get, when the law says it should get it. Or do you mean instead that Lussenhop should go beyond the statutory minimum? Probably he should. In a sense, he is already. In one month, he's shown up at two very public meetings (in the sense that anyone could have attended) which I was present at, for reasons unrelated to him. Both arenas do feel like a part of my public life. He put out gobs of info and heard lots of feedback. I fear you are creating a conundrum for yourself, based on slippery and contradictory definitions of public. If any meetings beyond the publicly required legal minimum are held, by definition no such meetings can be truly public. That's because no meeting organizer can assume public liability for all that nasty technical stuff like notification, etc. if there are in fact no public rules that govern it. Therefore all such supernumerary public meetings must have an arbitrary, ad-hoc private quality. That applies with equal force to a meeting organized by you, to fulfill a dream of critiquing the project to your heart's content, as it would to a meeting organized by Lussenhop, to fulfill a dream of not having to listen to you at all. Otherwise, any faction could just keep declaring that no community participation was real unless it led to the outcome that faction desired. I'm all for hearing more about this project, and I know many others are. I'll take advantage of any opportunity I come across to follow it. I hope the community gets ample participation. The best way to ensure that, is to encourage as many different forms of community interaction as possible, without placing unreasonable expectations on any one of them. That, to me, is public life at its best. Without a doubt, though, whenever the rubber hits the road on any multi-million-dollar project like this, the final decisions will be made by those public agents that hold the statutory authority to do so. Neither you nor I will be deputized to make it for them, Ray. They like their authority. -- Tony West this project needs to be made public and visible and clear -- now, with real participation from the community -- and lussenhop needs to pause, and listen, and stop fumbling his project through a half-filled stadium of half-informed onlookers. seriously. 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. -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.503 / Virus Database: 269.15.31/1130 - Release Date: 11/14/2007 9:27 AM 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] What you mean 'public', community man? (Was: Re: added details on the 400 S. 40th proposal)
Ray, That depends on what you mean by public. If you mean complying with public statutes about public meetings, then HC and ZBA procedures do have requirements for certain degrees of public input. Lussenhop will have to meet these requirements, for sure; his project, like any other, needs to be made public in that manner. The community is entitled to whatever participation the law says it should get, when the law says it should get it. Or do you mean instead that Lussenhop should go beyond the statutory minimum? Probably he should. In a sense, he is already. In one month, he's shown up at two very public meetings (in the sense that anyone could have attended) which I was present at, for reasons unrelated to him. Both arenas do feel like a part of my public life. He put out gobs of info and heard lots of feedback. I fear you are creating a conundrum for yourself, based on slippery and contradictory definitions of public. If any meetings beyond the publicly required legal minimum are held, by definition no such meetings can be truly public. That's because no meeting organizer can assume public liability for all that nasty technical stuff like notification, etc. if there are in fact no public rules that govern it. Therefore all such supernumerary public meetings must have an arbitrary, ad-hoc private quality. That applies with equal force to a meeting organized by you, to fulfill a dream of critiquing the project to your heart's content, as it would to a meeting organized by Lussenhop, to fulfill a dream of not having to listen to you at all. Otherwise, any faction could just keep declaring that no community participation was real unless it led to the outcome that faction desired. I'm all for hearing more about this project, and I know many others are. I'll take advantage of any opportunity I come across to follow it. I hope the community gets ample participation. The best way to ensure that, is to encourage as many different forms of community interaction as possible, without placing unreasonable expectations on any one of them. That, to me, is public life at its best. Without a doubt, though, whenever the rubber hits the road on any multi-million-dollar project like this, the final decisions will be made by those public agents that hold the statutory authority to do so. Neither you nor I will be deputized to make it for them, Ray. They like their authority. -- Tony West this project needs to be made public and visible and clear -- now, with real participation from the community -- and lussenhop needs to pause, and listen, and stop fumbling his project through a half-filled stadium of half-informed onlookers. seriously. 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.
