I've explained this before, but here it goes again:
As I told Barry Connell earlier, sometimes a blog can get away from a person. And as he noted, that's why they can be dangerous.
And, as we were talking I recalled that he announced at a previous City Council meeting at which they were discussing the sewer plant, that he belonged to the AYC.
Further, as he pointed out, any "taking" of land would be done by the city, not the City Council.
And here goes this again: wow, when you get all bent out of shape about something some random person writes, you give them all the power.
You don't want to be doing that. Seriously, that's not good for you. Keep all the power in your own hands.
Councillor Connell gave me a ring on the phone, I admitted to goofing up, and we talked about it like the two rational people that we are. If he had done anything different, it would have given me the power to strike again (not that I particularly meant to strike the first time).
A nice polite questioning of my (or anyone's) post and using a real name would have been more appropriate. Or sending a private email if you don't want your name out there.
So would no longer reading this blog, if that was your choice.
I'm just sayin', as a person who has spent nearly a whole lifetime surrendering power to others by reacting badly, that it's better if you keep that particular power on your side.
Trust me, I'm the reporter.
Wednesday, July 15, 2009
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
7 comments:
"trust me, i'm the reporter"
then get your facts straight.
I was being a tad sarcastic about myself, but your point is taken.
However, "Anonymous" is nonetheless "anonymous." Which was part of your piece as well.
The only error in Gillian's 'scoop' was in the misconception that the subject property was held by the Boat Club. The property in question has been a target of the boat club for a long while, A an offer was made to purchase (although it being low) by the sea farers and this was rejected by the owner. But, what seems amiss here is that a councilor that has a personal interest in the 'city' purchasing the land and the possible return of the use of the property in a lease back or some 'other agreement, through 'the city' that he represents and he has not made his connection as public as should be proper. A very vocal influence to the procedures at that! Disclosure may be the question at hand? And possible sequester? Agreeing to spending the 'City's money for a future storage expansion for a vested association is a rather bold move and a risky venture, if one does not have a seat at the table!
Another 'Anonymous'?
Anyone can be anonymous. We are carrots.
anonymous 2, you mean the yacht club, not the boat club. two different places entirely.
Boats, yachts or barges, all are baskets of money sinking to the ocean floor, slowly! Ensigns all and not a Boatswain to be found!The story is disturbingly familiar with local government as it is.
Post a Comment