|
|
Post by doctorwho on Feb 17, 2008 17:51:39 GMT -6
OK I will take your word that you did not, but there are indications it came from the TG/Pencross area. Can you refute that? Seeing as the Ad placers were cowards and did not sign their names to the ad. Cowards? They exercised their very American First Amendment rights to express their displeasure and concern at the SB's current direction. Why does this threaten you? If you disagree - that's fine. The campaign to crucify whoever did it is pretty sad. So there's people who don't support what the district is doing...if you do, that's fine. What I see is a pattern of trying to silence or shame anyone who disagrees with the district or SB. I don't know who placed the ad - but I do know there are a large number of people in my area who are upset - not a handful. Almost the entire central and near south portiion of the district is upset over this -- and theonly schools in that area who are not are McCarty/Steck - who are sched for WV and Welch- SB targeted for NV. Move McC or Steck to MV or Welch-SB to WB and they would be up in arms also -- although they don't seem toundersstand why we are -- let eh SB-SD change the boundaries to make any of the switches I just mentioned and then come back and talk to me |
|
|
|
Post by wvhsparent on Feb 17, 2008 17:53:10 GMT -6
Because if I take a stand on something I put my name on it and claim responsibilty for it.
Something I did early on with Topher, fence and myself. we all put our names on it.
So yes to me it is cowardly. I am not threatened by it at all.
Think about it; when is the last time you put a lot of weight on an anonymous posting?
|
|
|
|
Post by lacy on Feb 17, 2008 17:55:12 GMT -6
The suggestion is that the SB conducts themselves in such a way as to "take things out" on certain people - or maybe lots of people - if they are mad. Is that what you're saying? If that's the case, then we all need to demand that they step down. Because quite frankly, if we all showed up and collectively mooned them, they should still act in the best interests of all the students. But the feeling I get is that they like certain areas and don't like others and that affects their decisions. And you just can't expect people to keep taking that. No, Lacy, I'm sure the board won't act like I would. I tend to take things personally, and you are right, eveyone has a right to their own opinions and I believe the board respects that. However, to demand the board treat everyone fairly is a huge demand IMO. IF it can be done, the board should treat everyone fairly. And given where the new school is, I just don't see that happening. Several schools WILL be treated unfairly. I think several schools were treated unfairly in the last boundary proposal too. And it will be more this time. And I do feel for everyone that this affects. I can see a light at the end of the tunnel for Owen and maybe Watts if there is a distance respect for the north and McC/Steck are switched. But as for Fry, I don't see how swapping Welch which are walkers for Fry which are walkers is going to do anyone any good. I personally hope they choose to address Petersen issues too although I think only a small portion of Petersen is truly unhappy there so that may be looked over (sorry, Ashwood folks). That's why I believe if people would rally around these poor folks, maybe they have a chance of being heard. I too hope they can fix something about the Petersen situation. But if that "fix" means they are all reunited at NVHS, that won't fly at all in the Fry community. Think people are mad now... To come south of 95th and only take Fry would smack of some real political agenda. If they could take Tamarack, Andermann Acres and Petersen with us, if probably wouldn't have seemed as bad as it did. But take just us and a small portion of Petersen and then attach that memo.... Well, you know the rest. |
|
|
|
Post by lacy on Feb 17, 2008 17:57:37 GMT -6
Because if I take a stand on something I put my name on it and claim responsibilty for it. Something I did early on with Topher, fence and myself. we all put our names on it. So yes to me it is cowardly. I am not threatened by it at all. Think about it; when is the last time you put a lot of weight on an anonymous posting? I think people on this message board have more than established the possibility that the SB could be vindictive. So I wouldn't blame people for not attaching their name. Why don't you post your real name here? Since we're not putting alot of weight into anonymous postings, I think I'll go up and make dinner. |
|
|
|
Post by wvhsparent on Feb 17, 2008 17:59:45 GMT -6
Seeing as the Ad placers were cowards and did not sign their names to the ad we may never know who placed the ad. Anyone here want to claim responsibilty for the ad? Undercover officers often don't give their name either out of fear of repercussions. I see this as the same thing. They still did the job they set out to do, but shielded themselves from targeted personal backlash. But undercover officers are not placing an ad in a newspaper. |
|
|
|
Post by Arch on Feb 17, 2008 18:02:20 GMT -6
Undercover officers often don't give their name either out of fear of repercussions. I see this as the same thing. They still did the job they set out to do, but shielded themselves from targeted personal backlash. But undercover officers are not placing an ad in a newspaper. What is illegal or immoral about what was done? John/Jane Doe printed material dates back before the birth of this nation. |
|
|
|
Post by confused on Feb 17, 2008 18:05:23 GMT -6
The suggestion is that the SB conducts themselves in such a way as to "take things out" on certain people - or maybe lots of people - if they are mad. Is that what you're saying? If that's the case, then we all need to demand that they step down. Because quite frankly, if we all showed up and collectively mooned them, they should still act in the best interests of all the students. But the feeling I get is that they like certain areas and don't like others and that affects their decisions. And you just can't expect people to keep taking that. No, Lacy, I'm sure the board won't act like I would. I tend to take things personally, and you are right, eveyone has a right to their own opinions and I believe the board respects that. However, to demand the board treat everyone fairly is a huge demand IMO. IF it can be done, the board should treat everyone fairly. And given where the new school is, I just don't see that happening. Several schools WILL be treated unfairly. I think several schools were treated unfairly in the last boundary proposal too. And it will be more this time. And I do feel for everyone that this affects. I can see a light at the end of the tunnel for Owen and maybe Watts if there is a distance respect for the north and McC/Steck are switched. But as for Fry, I don't see how swapping Welch which are walkers for Fry which are walkers is going to do anyone any good. I personally hope they choose to address Petersen issues too although I think only a small portion of Petersen is truly unhappy there so that may be looked over (sorry, Ashwood folks). That's why I believe if people would rally around these poor folks, maybe they have a chance of being heard. What can be done for Petersen? What is a solution that people could rally around? That's what I have trouble seeing. You can't "fix" their issue without changing a lot of other things. There is possibly room to send ALL of Petersen to WV, but it appears that NV is fairly full and I can't see how they can send ALL of Petersen to NV. Additionally, if you did try to send ALL of Petersen to NV, you'd be hopscotching over Fry. |
|
|
|
Post by wvhsparent on Feb 17, 2008 18:18:33 GMT -6
But undercover officers are not placing an ad in a newspaper. What is illegal or immoral about what was done? John/Jane Doe printed material dates back before the birth of this nation. Never said it was illegal or immoral...I said it was cowardly. |
|
|
|
Post by Arch on Feb 17, 2008 18:25:25 GMT -6
What is illegal or immoral about what was done? John/Jane Doe printed material dates back before the birth of this nation. Never said it was illegal or immoral...I said it was cowardly. We're all cowards then because we all have handles and are not using our real names on here. |
|
|
|
Post by blankcheck on Feb 17, 2008 18:26:50 GMT -6
Who were behind 204thekids? Really - think about it? You could put names with the CFO organization.
|
|
|
|
Post by WeBe204 on Feb 17, 2008 18:27:29 GMT -6
Never said it was illegal or immoral...I said it was cowardly. We're all cowards then because we all have handles and are not using our real names on here. Amen  Hey, I have a quesiton. When is the closing date for the land? I mean the date on the sales contract when the deal actually gets closed? |
|
|
|
Post by Arch on Feb 17, 2008 18:30:01 GMT -6
We're all cowards then because we all have handles and are not using our real names on here. Amen Hey, I have a quesiton. When is the closing date for the land? I mean the date on the sales contract when the deal actually gets closed? I do not know exactly but from several unrelated sources there was mention of trying to have it all wrapped up by March 10th. I have the suspicion that time frame wants to be pulled in much closer though. |
|
|
|
Post by Arch on Feb 17, 2008 18:31:09 GMT -6
Who were behind 204thekids? Really - think about it? You could put names with the CFO organization. Yup.. like it or not, PW and GV always had a set hanging even if what they wrote or said was not what I wanted to read or hear. One can always go pull the contributions listings from the IL site if one really wants the answer to the question you asked. |
|
|
|
Post by blankcheck on Feb 17, 2008 18:33:37 GMT -6
Bottom line -
1) As I have always stated - Why ARE you voting for something that you do not know the price?
2) Boundaries can (and will) always be changed - PERIOD! That question along with the land
purchase was not in the ACTUAL question on the referendum.
3) The SB now has your $$$ - They can (and will) do whatever they want - Again - you gave them a "Blankcheck"
4) The only loophole I can think of is the bond that they have bought.
5) You had your voice in re-electing several members of this board. You have to live with your choice. (and their decisions)
From day one of this whole referendum thing, I knew it would be a mess - Look in the archives at my posts.
Whatever they decide now, will be the fate for years to come. (I'm talking further referendums - I can hear it now - "If you don't pass this, the new school will not open)
You get what you pay for (or in this case voted for)
|
|
|
|
Post by bob on Feb 17, 2008 18:34:05 GMT -6
|
|
Hey, I have a quesiton. When is the closing date for the land? I mean the date on the sales contract when the deal actually gets closed?