Town Square

Post a New Topic

Why does the turf topic keep getting shut to nonregistered commentators?

Original post made by whatever, Menlo Park: Central Menlo Park, on Aug 15, 2014

I started the Town Square posting on the topic and I am not a registered user. As I started it I'd like it to remain open to comments by non-registered users. Can the Editor please explain to us why the comments were closed to non-registered users?

The commentators on Almanac are well aware that there are a very few who decry those of us who comment anonymously. However there are those of us who prefer our anonymity due to the abrasive, acerbic and tactless responses used by the smallest number of registered users. Perhaps the Editor should be policing the endless caustic comments by that smallest number.

Comments (49)

 +   Like this comment
Posted by Peter Carpenter
a resident of Atherton: Lindenwood
on Aug 16, 2014 at 7:50 am

Peter Carpenter is a registered user.

The best way to keep a thread from being restricted is to:

1 - observe the host's Terms of Use
2 - become a registered user

In my experience threads populated primarily by registered users maintain the desired balance between decorum and dialogue and disagreement - perhaps because registered users know that their postings can be identified by the hosts of the Forum with a specific IP and therefore exercise more care in the wording of their postings.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by neighbor
a resident of another community
on Aug 16, 2014 at 9:17 am

Here are 2 posts from a similar discussion on Palo Alto Online. The comments are pertinent here too.

(1)
Peter,
Good --- Sign your posts. Just don't attack others, or the content of their posts, because they don't or can't sign their posts.

What's fine for you isn't always fine for others.

(2)
Peter -- You ask: "When people post anonymously they are, by definition, hiding something - I wonder why?" You surely know there are all kinds of legitimate answers to your rhetorical question.

I get it that there are many folks who hide behind fake identities to post weird or provocative comments. I get it that it bugs you. Welcome to the internet.

There are also people who post anonymously to maintain their privacy for reasons that may have nothing to do with the article or local politics. Their names are simply not your business, or the business of the other posters, or the business of the random universe of readers of this website. Welcome to the internet.

I often have opinions I want to write, and I will always believe that it is not essential to attach my name/location to my opinions about local controversies. It's my personal decision. After all, I'm not a public persona and won't be holding/running for public office.

I am entitled to my opinion about this, as are you.....and will defend my right to express it anonymously without being belittled for doing so.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by drama queen
a resident of Atherton: Lindenwood
on Aug 16, 2014 at 9:24 am

One way to get it shut down is to ask a certain poster (who has a history pf talking down to other contributors, often using terms such as "fool") questions about the ROI of taxpayer dollars for plastic grass at a fire station.

The certain poster quite dramatically claimed he studied the situation for his home, but won't answer the question about his study for the taxpayer funded plastic grass.

If he ignored the decision, fine. Make a call and find out the results.

Just tell the voters.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Peter Carpenter
a resident of Atherton: Lindenwood
on Aug 16, 2014 at 9:56 am

Peter Carpenter is a registered user.

DraQueen - "won't answer the question about his study for the taxpayer funded plastic grass."

I did answer DQ's question - she just did not like my answer:

"Posted by Peter Carpenter, a resident of Atherton: Lindenwood
23 hours ago
Peter Carpenter is a registered user.
Drama - Please read the prior posts before making a fool of yourself again and again
Posted by Peter Carpenter, a resident of Atherton: Lindenwood
13 hours ago
Peter Carpenter is a registered user.

The Fire Chief's decision to replace water hungry grass with artificial turf was well within his delegated budget authority."

I support this decision and I do not second guess the Fire Chief's performance of his delegated authority.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by whatever
a resident of Menlo Park: Central Menlo Park
on Aug 16, 2014 at 9:59 am

Peter as a registered user you say above "threads populated primarily by registered users maintain the desired balance between decorum and dialogue and disagreement."

In all honesty, it is specifically your lack of such decorum which drives many of us to be anonymous or even refrain from making comments on this forum.

I do hope that you refrain from using your Almanac style of communication when responding to and communicating to the public in your capacity as a Fire board member, as inhibiting public participation could be construed as a violation of the Brown Act.

By the way Peter and Almanac Editor - the US Supreme Court has recognized a First Amendment right to speak anonymously. (Watchtower Bible & Tract Soc'y of N.Y., Inc. v. Vill. of Stratton, 536 U.S. 150 (2002)).


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Peter Carpenter
a resident of Atherton: Lindenwood
on Aug 16, 2014 at 10:31 am

Peter Carpenter is a registered user.

"your lack of such decorum"

Provide specific examples please.

In my opinion, challenging both groundless statements and posters who ask the same question over and over after it has been responded to are both appropriate responses. Well over 90% of my posting are citations from original sources and/or responses to specific questions added by others. I will grant that I do not suffer fools quietly - no apology from me on that.

"I do hope that you refrain from using your Almanac style of communication when responding to and communicating to the public in your capacity as a Fire board member, as inhibiting public participation could be construed as a violation of the Brown Act."

ALL of the Board meetings are video recorded and you will note that I always treat others with great respect and that I have never violated the Brown Act. Please feel free to attend our meetings and see for your self.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by neighbor
a resident of another community
on Aug 16, 2014 at 11:20 am

Peter --
You are not the editor of this website with whom I have other editing (censorship) disagreements and don't make the rules. You are no one's judge, yet you utterly dismiss rational comments by anonymous posters and seem to be trying to also censor certain writers.

Many people disagree with your position on the identity of posters for numerous reasons. Many of those who disagree with you do so from a thoughtful position.

Yet, you continue to dismiss them all outright. Very intolerant.

This is a community website dealing with local issues -- they are small issues, as the world goes, but commenters may have a lot at stake personally. It is not the New York Times.

I'll defend your right to your opinion, but not your continual dismissal of all anonymous writers. Your narrow position scares me a bit, so if you ran for office in my community I'd have to take that into account ... despite the fact that I often agree with you on particular community issues.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by whatever
a resident of Menlo Park: Central Menlo Park
on Aug 16, 2014 at 12:04 pm

Peter as you say above

"I will grant that I do not suffer fools quietly - no apology from me on that."

The perfect example of your lack of decorum, respectfulness and tact. If anyone disagrees with your comments or opinions or view of the world you call them "fools" which is as we all know synonymous with calling anyone who disagrees with you an idiot, ass, blockhead, dunce, dolt, ignoramus, imbecile, cretin, dullard, simpleton, moron, stooge, clod, etc. (check the thesaurus)

And those of us on the receiving end of such sanctimoniousness responses are to say the least tired of them.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by pogo
a resident of Woodside: other
on Aug 16, 2014 at 12:09 pm

pogo is a registered user.

You should note that while this is a community forum, The Almanac is a private business and is free to impose any rules it wants on their website, including restrictions, censorship and arbitrary rules. There is no free speech obligation for a private business.

If you don't like The Almanac's limitations, start a competing site with your own rules.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Peter Carpenter
a resident of Atherton: Lindenwood
on Aug 16, 2014 at 12:14 pm

Peter Carpenter is a registered user.

My personal posting standards are simple:
- about 90% of my postings are documented information from authoritative sources and those postings are generally in response to questions posed by other posters
- about 10% of my postings are my personal opinions
- when I see a factual posting or opinion from a poster whom I know and trust I generally accept it at face value
- when I see a factual post from someone I do not know , I.e. most anonymous posters, I will frequently challenge that poster to document their assertion.
- when it us clear that a poster has not had the simple courtesy to read previous posts and previous answers then I will challenge them to do so

If being intellectually and procedural challenged is offensive to you then I suggest that you not participate in a forum which calls for respectful , thoughtful and truthful discussion.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by whatever
a resident of Menlo Park: Central Menlo Park
on Aug 16, 2014 at 12:43 pm

Once again Peter another perfect example for you s requested.

"If being intellectually and procedural challenged is offensive to you then I suggest that you not participate in a forum which calls for respectful , thoughtful and truthful discussion."

Calling people intellectually and procedural challenged is offensive and goes completely against your "calls for respectful , thoughtful and truthful discussion."


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Peter Carpenter
a resident of Atherton: Lindenwood
on Aug 16, 2014 at 1:01 pm

Peter Carpenter is a registered user.

Whatever - your posting is a perfect example of why posters like you have such low credibility. I did NOT call anybody intellectually and procedurally challenged - read exactly what I posted. I believe that participants in this Forum should be intellectually honest and follow the procedures established in the TOS - which most posters have never even read.

Being precise is a habit of mine and one that I respect in others.

There is an appropriate saying - "If you can't take the heat stay out if the kitchen".


 +   Like this comment
Posted by drama queen
a resident of Atherton: Lindenwood
on Aug 16, 2014 at 1:38 pm

Peter: did you or did you not look at the calculations on the frivolous use of taxpayer money for plastic grass at a firr station?

Why not?

You dramatcally told readers how you studied it for your own home, why wouldn't you apply the same for taxpayer dollars and assist in the correct decision?

Also: please keep dramatically calling me a fool for asking about taxpayer dollars. So decor-ious!

We all love your arrogance. Especially when it comes to oversight of tax money.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Peter Carpenter
a resident of Atherton: Lindenwood
on Aug 16, 2014 at 1:47 pm

Peter Carpenter is a registered user.

DQ - I answered your question 4 times. This decision was made by the Fire Chief within his delegated authority. I have NO business interfering in that decision. Please read the Fire Board Policies and Procedures

It is foolish to ask the same question three more times after it has already been answered? I think it is.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by neighbor
a resident of another community
on Aug 16, 2014 at 2:26 pm

There is very little respectful discussion anymore on this site, and very little tolerance. Too bad, because there are some diverse, interesting, and informed opinions -- that have justified wading through a lot of silly or aggressive opinions from trolls, and some very strange political blocking from the editor.

Now, if all that's left is the Peter Carpenter show dismissing most cogent writers because he demands their names, I'm out of here.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by drama queen
a resident of Atherton: Lindenwood
on Aug 16, 2014 at 2:36 pm

There's a drama * around here.....

;-)

Beautiful day for a walk on grass!


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Peter Carpenter
a resident of Atherton: Lindenwood
on Aug 16, 2014 at 2:50 pm

Peter Carpenter is a registered user.

I never demanding anyone's name and I appreciate cogent arguments. But when someone with unknown source credibility states a "fact" I will challenge them to document their statement. And when posters misstate what I have posted I will note that either they cannot read or they are intentionally lying. I do not believe that this Forum is intended to be a fact free zone. And every poster should be prepared to defend their opinions, document their facts and be held accountable for what they post.

I won't hold my breath waiting for whatever to apologize for intentionally misstating my posts because he has no reputation to uphold and can change his name anytime he wants.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by drama queen
a resident of Atherton: Lindenwood
on Aug 16, 2014 at 2:59 pm

Its too bad there isnt better oversight that would have stopped the frivolous use of tax dollars for plastic grass at a fire atation that has no need for grass, unless Pete's 6 grandkids are coming over ro play ( see pc's previous dramatic comments)

How much was spent on this?

Its okay if you dont know the answer, just pontificate with the same non-answer 5 more times.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Peter Carpenter
a resident of Atherton: Lindenwood
on Aug 16, 2014 at 5:05 pm

Peter Carpenter is a registered user.

DQ - For the fifth time, the Fire District's expenditures to replace its water hunger grass with artificial turf were within the Fire Chief's delegated expenditure authority. The Routine Maintenance line item for these seven stations was $70,000 in 2012-13 and $16,000 in 2013-14.

As stated in the Board Policy Manual:
"The primary responsibility of the Board of Directors is the formulation and evaluation of policy. Routine matters concerning the operational aspects of the District are delegated to professional staff members of the District."

The Fire Chief will include a summary of the expenses incurred in installing artificial turf in his report at the Fire Board's 19 Aug meeting.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Green Acres
a resident of Menlo Park: The Willows
on Aug 16, 2014 at 5:35 pm

I would like to commend Peter Carpenter for his sensitivity to the environment. He not only talks the talk; but he walks the walk as well.

Peter I want to also thank you for that great public service and for the work that you, Chuck Bernstein and Rex Ianson are doing on the Fire Board on behalf of the community. Keep up the good work.

One bonus of the artificial lawn, that the community at large will appreciate immensly, is that there will be no Virginia Chang Kiraly for Fire Board lawn signs on his artificial turf. What a relief!


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Peter Carpenter
a resident of Atherton: Lindenwood
on Aug 16, 2014 at 5:50 pm

Peter Carpenter is a registered user.

Green Acres - Thank you for your comments.

Serving you and others as a Director of the Fire District is both a privilege and a responsibility.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by drama queen
a resident of Atherton: Lindenwood
on Aug 16, 2014 at 6:02 pm

All you had to do was say that up front - you didn't know thw answer.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Peter Carpenter
a resident of Atherton: Lindenwood
on Aug 16, 2014 at 6:12 pm

Peter Carpenter is a registered user.

Drama Queen ( what a perfect self selected moniker) asked:
"Peter: did you or did you not look at the calculations on the frivolous use of taxpayer money for plastic grass at a firr station?

Why not?"

I replied repeatedly that "the Fire District's expenditures to replace its water hunger grass with artificial turf were within the Fire Chief's delegated expenditure authority. "

Clearly DQ is not interested in answers but rather in drama, drama, drama...........


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Menlo Voter
a resident of Menlo Park: other
on Aug 16, 2014 at 6:22 pm

Menlo Voter is a registered user.

drama queen:

all you had to do was read one of his many responses to get your answer. Instead you went the troll route and continued to prod. Peter made it pretty clear he didn't know the answer when he said it was the Fire Chief's call. If you know how a supervisorial board works you know that they don't spend their days looking over the shoulders of staff who's responsibility it is to make day to day decisions. Unless, of course, you're Atherton, who's council members can't seem to keep themselves from meddling. Nothing better to do I guess.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by drama queen
a resident of Atherton: Lindenwood
on Aug 16, 2014 at 6:33 pm

tsk tsk boys... we all know someone had extrayax money in his budget and it was a use it or lose it deal.

Accountability.

And Pete, by now you know who the moniker was for, don't you? Telling the world about a 90k plastic carpet, just so one can say they are green? Why, thats so politically correct, or,well, you know....

Call me a fool, one more time, just for the memories..... ;-)


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Fisherman
a resident of Atherton: other
on Aug 16, 2014 at 6:42 pm

Peter Carpenter should stop taking Drama Queen's bait (in other words, the high road) and let this thread die the ignominious death it deserves.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Bernard
a resident of Menlo Park: South of Seminary/Vintage Oaks
on Aug 17, 2014 at 12:54 pm

I get how someone may make a decision and wanting to put rug outside of one's home - well, I get that it's a personal decision. (Lord knows, not mine and I certainly wouldn't publicize it.)

I don't understand two things:

- first, putting it outside a firehouse: why? we can save water two ways: cement, or native plantings, both costing less than fifty grand. There is no need for grass. There is no need for fake grass. Also: why was the fire department spending money on hiring someone else to mow grass? They wash their own trucks, is pushing a mower around is too much exercise?

"The Routine Maintenance line item for these seven stations was $70,000 in 2012-13" is Mr. Carpenter implying that this was all lawn care and water bills? Who audits this?

- second, there was an extra fifty thousand in the budget for an independent decision to spend on turf? "we all know someone had extrayax [sic - extra tax?] money in his budget and it was a use it or lose it deal"

Well? Was it a case of a department manager deciding to spend the money or potentially getting a smaller budget next year? It happens in every company, is that what happened here?


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Peter Carpenter
a resident of Atherton: Lindenwood
on Aug 17, 2014 at 4:09 pm

Peter Carpenter is a registered user.

Bernard posted - " there was an extra fifty thousand in the budget for an independent decision to spend on turf"

That is factually wrong.

Bernard posted - "why was the fire department spending money on hiring someone else to mow grass?"

This is also factually wrong as the Fire District does its own maintenance at the fire stations.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Joe
a resident of Menlo Park: Allied Arts/Stanford Park
on Aug 17, 2014 at 4:31 pm

I think Bernard has a very good point, which I will probably diverge from because that is my wont. I do my best.

Anyway, this is not Iowa and we should get over it with this lawn business, real or fake. California is a semi-arid state and its vegetation reflects that circumstance. It's planned vegetation should also, particularly with a taxpayer funded public agency.

With the drought and with the emphasis on resource conservation in general, public agencies that are not in the business of providing recreational areas and are in the business of leading by example should have vegetation common to the west.

It's not hard to find a native plant list. The hard part is nurturing and maintaining them once they're in the ground. But it's worth it.

I don't own a house and I don't have children or grandchildren, but if I did my yards would be native and the children would have to figure out a way to have fun in a native setting.

Given that native plants attract native insects and insects attract native birds and other species in search of protein, I expect my yard would be a joy for exploring and having a good time.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Bernard
a resident of Menlo Park: South of Seminary/Vintage Oaks
on Aug 17, 2014 at 4:34 pm

Thank you so much for the reply.

Peter Carpenter posted: "as the Fire District does its own maintenance at the fire stations."

Then why, in response to a question regarding installing turf did you bring up routine maintenance expenses? ("water hunger grass with artificial turf ... The Routine Maintenance line item for these seven stations was $70,000 in 2012-13")

It doesn't seem to me to apply. Please show me the error of my thinking. How does the $70,000 routine maintenance expense relate to removing natural grass if the firefighters performed their own maintenance on lawns?

You failed to address there are other ways to save water, including natural stone, rock, concrete, pavers, natural plantings or a combination of them. Aren't these better and more elegant ways to save money if the goal is strictly water savings? (leaving alone the number of times one sees water running down the gutter from a local station)

Peter Carpenter posted in reply to "there was an extra fifty thousand in the budget for an independent decision to spend on turf": "That is factually wrong." (without a helpful further explanation for those like me that are struggling to understand.)

Now I'm lost; if the $50,000 wasn't sitting somewhere in the budget, how was this paid for within the "delegated expenditure authority"?

Are they allowed to go off budget? Please help me, and other interested readers, to understand.

Thank you.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Peter Carpenter
a resident of Atherton: Lindenwood
on Aug 17, 2014 at 4:56 pm

Peter Carpenter is a registered user.

"Then why, in response to a question regarding installing turf did you bring up routine maintenance expenses?"

Because that is the budget line item that covered the installation of the artificial turf and the amount spent was within the delegated authority of the Chief.

"if the $50,000 wasn't sitting somewhere in the budget, how was this paid for within the "delegated expenditure authority"?"

It was in the budget exactly where I told you it was: - The Routine Maintenance line item for these seven stations was $70,000 in 2012-13 and $16,000 in 2013-14


What other off topic questions do you have?

And do readers begin to understand why threads are locked to unregistered users who abuse the TOS, post off topic and engage in calumnious behavior?


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Bernard
a resident of Menlo Park: South of Seminary/Vintage Oaks
on Aug 17, 2014 at 5:10 pm

Mr. Carpenter - I thought my questions were respectful, responsive and thoughtful. I'm sorry you do not think so.

That was the first time, unless I missed it (I went back and re-read the thread) that you said the turf was paid for out of the routine maintenance line item (you always fell back on a limited phrase: "within his delegated authority".)

If the lawn maintenance was performed by firefighters and therefore did not have a distinct cost (they are already paid), why was replacing grass with turf a "maintenance" issue, since it does not materially effect a past of future maintenance issue or cost?


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Peter Carpenter
a resident of Atherton: Lindenwood
on Aug 17, 2014 at 5:16 pm

Peter Carpenter is a registered user.

Bernard - Your questions are off the topic of this thread and that it why I noted that fact.

"That was the first time, unless I missed it (I went back and re-read the thread) that you said the turf was paid for out of the routine maintenance line item"

You did miss it:
"Posted by Peter Carpenter, a resident of Atherton: Lindenwood
on Aug 16, 2014 at 5:05 pm
Peter Carpenter is a registered user.
DQ - For the fifth time, the Fire District's expenditures to replace its water hunger grass with artificial turf were within the Fire Chief's delegated expenditure authority. The Routine Maintenance line item for these seven stations was $70,000 in 2012-13 and $16,000 in 2013-14."

" why was replacing grass with turf a "maintenance" issue,"
Because when you spend money to maintain a facility that is the account that the money comes from.

If you have any more off topic questions then I suggest that you start a new topic on your issue. It is very easy to do.



 +   Like this comment
Posted by Bernard
a resident of Menlo Park: South of Seminary/Vintage Oaks
on Aug 17, 2014 at 5:34 pm

Mr. Carpenter:

You yourself posted fire dept information in the thread about your home: "Some posters have asked about the artificial turf which has been installed at the fire stations...", so please try not to chastise others for referring to it.

As to your answer, I apologize. I read your comment: "..within the Fire Chief's delegated expenditure authority. The Routine Maintenance..." as having a period, instead of saying: "within the Fire Chief's delegated expenditure authority (no period) WITHIN The Routine Maintenance..."

I know this must upset you terribly, so again, I'm sorry for reading your sentences literally.

Again, I have to ask: how is replacing existing grass with turf a maintenance issue when there is no existing maintenance cost to the existing grass? Isn't this an improvement, not maintenance?


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Peter Carpenter
a resident of Atherton: Lindenwood
on Aug 17, 2014 at 5:37 pm

Peter Carpenter is a registered user.

"You yourself posted fire dept information in the thread about your home: "Some posters have asked about the artificial turf which has been installed at the fire stations..."

I usually will answer the first off topic question but then I refrain as I will now.

So if you have any more off topic questions then I suggest that you start a new topic on your issue. It is very easy to do.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Bernard
a resident of Menlo Park: South of Seminary/Vintage Oaks
on Aug 17, 2014 at 5:46 pm

Thank you for explaining that you are so gracious as to answer one (what you perceive to be) off-topic question, but somehow can't manage a second.

Mr Carpenter: how is replacing existing grass with turf a maintenance issue when there is no existing maintenance cost to the existing grass? Isn't this an improvement, not maintenance?


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Peter Carpenter
a resident of Atherton: Lindenwood
on Aug 17, 2014 at 5:54 pm

Peter Carpenter is a registered user.

If you have any more off topic questions then I suggest that you start a new topic on your issue. It is very easy to do. And perhaps someone will be willing to answer your questions since there is no obligation to do so.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Joe
a resident of Menlo Park: Allied Arts/Stanford Park
on Aug 17, 2014 at 5:57 pm

Mr. Carpenter, you seem to think that you occupy some kind of high ground by proposing to define what is on-topic and what is not. You don't.

Your version of what's on topic is yours. Others may agree with you, but many clearly do not. You appear to have developed a particular skill in maintaining a narrow focus, but so what? You don't run the world.

The kind of thinking and dialog you appear to espouse seems more appropriate to a courtroom, not an online discussion group. You're not the moderator, though you seem to like that role.

You're very precise in your own way. Congratulations. Well done. Just stop thrusting your ways on the rest of us.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Peter Carpenter
a resident of Atherton: Lindenwood
on Aug 17, 2014 at 6:00 pm

Peter Carpenter is a registered user.

Joe - My definition of off topic is quite reasonable and, in any case, I have no obligation to respond to posts if I do not wish to do so.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Bernard
a resident of Menlo Park: South of Seminary/Vintage Oaks
on Aug 17, 2014 at 6:21 pm

Mr. Carpenter: you seem quite happy to inform the world that "about 90% of my postings are documented information from authoritative sources and those postings are generally in response to questions posed by other posters"

Okay, no one asked about that, but thanks for sharing.

I am asking a question of an elected official, well within what he maintains as his area of authority (enough that he claims earlier to answer the same question five times.)

You have spent more time NOT answering the question than it would take to give us a thoughtful, full response. It actually begs more questions.

Mr Carpenter: how is replacing existing grass with turf a maintenance issue when there is no existing maintenance cost to the existing grass? Isn't this an improvement, not maintenance?

Are you not answering it because you are uncomfortable with the decision?

Do you intend to investigate this further?

Did you have prior knowledge of these decisions? Is that the reason you are uncomfortable answering these questions in a public forum?

Are you refusing to answer because you plan on asking the same questions of the Chief? If so, sorry I spoiled your surprise.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Bernard
a resident of Menlo Park: South of Seminary/Vintage Oaks
on Aug 17, 2014 at 6:28 pm

Or are you unhappy about your typo being pointed out?


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Peter Carpenter
a resident of Atherton: Lindenwood
on Aug 17, 2014 at 6:28 pm

Peter Carpenter is a registered user.

"I am asking a question of an elected official, well within what he maintains as his area of authority "

If you have a question of a Fire Board Director then you should send that question to them at their official email address:

Web Link

I have answered many questions on this Forum as a courtesy but that courtesy has been particularly abused on this topic.

Therefore I reserve the right to ignore any question posed to me on this forum.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Bernard
a resident of Menlo Park: South of Seminary/Vintage Oaks
on Aug 17, 2014 at 6:33 pm

"I have answered many questions on this Forum as a courtesy but that courtesy has been particularly abused on this topic. Therefore I reserve the right to ignore any question posed to me on this forum."

How courteous. Particularly of an elected official.

Well, sorry I ticked you off about those two sentences.

Let us know when you feel like answering the following questions about your self-proclaimed area of expertise, or the position to which you were elected.

************************************************

* how is replacing existing grass with turf a maintenance issue when there is no existing maintenance cost to the existing grass? Isn't this an improvement, not maintenance?

* Are you not answering it because you are uncomfortable with the decision?

* Do you intend to investigate this further?

* Did you have prior knowledge of these decisions? Is that the reason you are uncomfortable answering these questions in a public forum?

* Are you refusing to answer because you plan on asking the same questions of the Chief?


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Peter Carpenter
a resident of Atherton: Lindenwood
on Aug 17, 2014 at 6:42 pm

Peter Carpenter is a registered user.

As previously posted, I reserve the right to ignore any questions posed to me on this forum and I will not be answering any further questions posted on this topic.

On this topic I believe that the best way to keep a thread from being restricted is to:

1 - observe the host's Terms of Use
2 - become a registered user

In my experience threads populated primarily by registered users maintain the desired balance between decorum and dialogue and disagreement - perhaps because registered users know that their postings can be identified by the hosts of the Forum with a specific IP and therefore exercise more care in the wording of their postings.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Bernard
a resident of Menlo Park: South of Seminary/Vintage Oaks
on Aug 17, 2014 at 6:54 pm

That is really weak tea.

"between decorum and dialogue and disagreement" ("calumnious"?) does not apply to your refusal to answer a simple question in an area you've spent days discussing, an area that you claim to have expertise. Your refusal raises further questions, of course.

That you go on and on, trying to change the topic after participating for days, is really, really weak.

If not an indication of something to hide...

************************************************

* the first question: how is replacing existing grass with turf a maintenance issue when there is no existing maintenance cost to the existing grass? Isn't this an improvement, not maintenance?

The questions raised by your evasion, in an area of self-proclaimed expertise:

* Are you not answering it because you are uncomfortable with the decision?

* Do you intend to investigate this further?

* Did you have prior knowledge of these decisions? Is that the reason you are uncomfortable answering these questions in a public forum?

* Are you refusing to answer because you plan on asking the same questions of the Chief?


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Peter Carpenter
a resident of Atherton: Lindenwood
on Aug 17, 2014 at 6:59 pm

Peter Carpenter is a registered user.

As previously posted, I reserve the right to ignore any questions posed to me on this forum and I will not be answering any further questions posted on this topic.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Bernard
a resident of Menlo Park: South of Seminary/Vintage Oaks
on Aug 17, 2014 at 7:26 pm

"I reserve the right to ignore any questions posed to me on this forum and I will not be answering any further questions posted on this topic."

I'm pretty sure I voted for you, Mr. Carpenter (honestly, I'm not as sure on the far down ballot offices as I should be.)

I'm sure it does not surprise you, nor bother you, to be informed of this occurrence having small chance of being repeated. Thousands and thousands of posts, opinions on many areas, some sought by others, or not. You spent far more time telling voters that you won't answer the question about a taxpayer funded enterprise, than just giving the answer.

Pitiful.

Good evening.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Menlo Voter
a resident of Menlo Park: other
on Aug 17, 2014 at 7:39 pm

Menlo Voter is a registered user.

Bernard:

[portion deleted.] If you are honestly interested in the things you have questioned, send an email to the fire board or, here's a novel idea, actually go to a meeting and ask your questions.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Peter Carpenter
a resident of Atherton: Lindenwood
on Aug 17, 2014 at 8:02 pm

Peter Carpenter is a registered user.

Since any conversation/discussion is by mutual consent of the parties involved I have blocked further responses by me to the following posters regardless of the topic:

Observer
Bernard
Drama Queen

Feel free to ask to be added to this list.


Sorry, but further commenting on this topic has been closed.

I Told My Mom She's Dying
By Chandrama Anderson | 12 comments | 2,548 views

Grab a Bowl of Heaven soon in Mountain View
By Elena Kadvany | 0 comments | 1,927 views

Quick Check List for UC Applications
By John Raftrey and Lori McCormick | 0 comments | 1,273 views

Fancy Fast and Fun!
By Laura Stec | 3 comments | 984 views

“I live near Sunset”
By Stuart Soffer | 5 comments | 496 views