I'm still thinking ...

Wow, you know?

That Sewer Commission meeting was one week ago today. The Current had already put its Feb. 27 edition to bed, so there was no way a story about the Plum Island sewer was getting in that issue.

I've been darting about City Hall, talking to people and whatnot and watching, listening and waiting this whole time for the Daily News to catch on.

We almost made it to print without them having a clue.

And what I think is that one, you've got to cover meetings. Right there on the agenda for the SC meeting, it says "Plum Island" as part of the new business.

Not that I saw the agenda before I went to the meeting, mind you. I was tipped off by someone who I assume is pissed off at the Daily News and thus did not alert them.

Which brings me to my second thought, which is that you try not to piss people off too much.

Last year, when I was having all those difficulties with the (then) editor of the Current, I wrote a story about the Harbor Commission. She insisted that I change it around to imply that someone from the commission was lying, because she concluded that he was.

I did not think that was such a good idea - I had presented two opposing statements and left it up to the reader to decide who was being honest and who was not.

But no - she changed it.

Now the person from the Harbor Commission I'm sure will never speak to me again, if I need to talk to him about some issue. And I caught some flak from the mayor, who was not pleased that the Current had maligned a citizen who volunteers on a city commission.

You want to present the truth, of course - and I've found that you don't get into that much trouble with reasonable people if you print the plain truth of the matter, even if it makes them look bad - but you don't want to be unfair.

So because the DN was even what I considered to be unfair to this person, I think he gave me the heads up and not them - although he usually goes straight to them.

That happens more than you'd think.

It's all an intricate dance.