|
|
Post by momto4 on Feb 22, 2006 17:17:12 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by charmant on Feb 22, 2006 17:32:36 GMT -6
Boy, the vote is closer than I thought!!! Why would their site come across with such vehemence if their facts and figs are on point and they know they are right??? They should have 'stayed the course' and kept their noses clean. They have lost all credibility now.............wow! |
|
|
|
Post by admin on Feb 22, 2006 17:37:06 GMT -6
It is called attack attack attack. They sat on their asses last time and got whipped. This should be good fun to watch. It comes down to who has the most money.
|
|
|
|
Post by stinks on Feb 22, 2006 17:38:43 GMT -6
Boy, the vote is closer than I thought!!! Why would their site come across with such vehemence if their facts and figs are on point and they know they are right??? They should have 'stayed the course' and kept their noses clean. They have lost all credibility now.............wow! What a joke. Georgie V and his minions have been spreading FUD like there's no tomorrow. It must be hard for the NO people to finally see their arguments refuted. |
|
|
|
Post by warriorpride on Feb 22, 2006 18:07:12 GMT -6
Boy, the vote is closer than I thought!!! Why would their site come across with such vehemence if their facts and figs are on point and they know they are right??? They should have 'stayed the course' and kept their noses clean. They have lost all credibility now.............wow! Sorry, some of us may have missed something. Where's the loss of credibility? |
|
|
|
Post by fence on Feb 22, 2006 19:46:39 GMT -6
Good for them. At least they are able to provide counter-points to some of CFOs major positions. I'm not a real cheerleader for that group, but I do like to see a good debate.
I didn't realize CFO didn't provide the 2nd half of the capacity information. Interesting. I'm glad that they got that out there. Good show!
From the reaction, could CFO be a little worried perhaps, now that what they are saying has been challenged directly claim for claim??
|
|
|
|
Post by charmant on Feb 22, 2006 20:13:33 GMT -6
From my view
The SB group hates to be called on anything.......feeling free to throw out numbers and feeling no one will question them....and if you repeat something long enough( 3rd hs or bust, no boundary changes we swear or BB is the only option ) - that people will just let one do it and other will buy it.
It's about time the VOTE NO took the gloves off and exposed some of the bunk............TWICE
- they sat back giving only one option -- and lost
this time too!!
the SB chooses to pick and choose what they release and how they use data.....people are starting to see thru the baloney and realize if anything, the SB may be wrong again on their estimates of kids.................and when someone calls them on it , it is a sign of weakness....
|
|
|
|
Post by stinks on Feb 22, 2006 21:19:06 GMT -6
Some are just more relevant than others . . .
|
|
|
|
Post by Avenging Eagle on Feb 22, 2006 21:55:25 GMT -6
Thanks for posting this. It is interesting that both the VoteNo site and the 204thekids site are starting to look a lot like some of our threads on here. VoteNO says: XSJSAJDFLJADSFJADFLAJDSALDKFJALK;DJFLADJFFLJ204thekids: NO! YOU ARE WRONG!!.................,,,XADFAJDFLADSJF;LAJDFLK;JADSLK;FJ
LA;SDJFLAJDJFVoteNO says On the Contrary!!!!............, XADFJADLFJALDSFJALDJFALDKJFA;LKDSJFL;KAJDS
FL;AJSDFL;JADSL;FJALDS;JFLAJDFALet the battles begin!! |
|
|
|
Post by Arch on Feb 22, 2006 22:56:02 GMT -6
I'm waiting for the DNS hijack  |
|
|
|
Post by wvhsparent on Feb 23, 2006 5:15:04 GMT -6
Personally all sides are guilty of "selective information sharing".
It's done all the time by everyone.
Thats why I have been a proponent of getting all info, good and bad, out there and let us sift thru it and make up our own minds
|
|
|
|
Post by gatormom on Feb 23, 2006 7:20:51 GMT -6
Unfortunately, too many people don't take the time to do the homework.
It is very easy to be lulled by the quick facts provided by one side or the other. Why should I think, someone else is doing it for me.
It is good that the yes side is responding in kind. Those who want to dig further will.
|
|
|
|
Post by blankcheck on Feb 23, 2006 7:49:26 GMT -6
In briefly looking at their letter refuting CFO, I would question - they state that the freshman campuses have a capsity of 1200 students. Utilizing 80% capasity would be 960 students. STR figures are 1380 using 85% capasity, which means total capasity would be 1623. So your saying the architect who built the school is giving out false information? And why would the district work sheet for construction grants show available capasity at each building at 806.7? Even 204 the kids would be wrong then when compared with the districts own worksheet.
|
|
|
|
Post by blankcheck on Feb 23, 2006 8:11:17 GMT -6
Also, under the school district worksheet, for example, the figures for Patterson & Springbrook. Those school were built with 950 total student capsity. THeir works sheet states 619.5 available capasity - that is saying that those buildings are operating at 62% capasity. SInce when do we operate like that?
|
|
|
|
Post by kae on Feb 23, 2006 8:25:17 GMT -6
The one difference that I noticed between the 204thekids website and the CFO website is that 204thekids has nothing to back up that letter and the figures they used.
For example, where is the documentation that tells what the actual capacity of the school is? Where are the letters from the builders that tell what the capacity of the two high schools are? CFO has one letter posted on their board showing the capacity of the NVHS Gold Campus. Why doesn't the school board/district post those letters from STR or the builders for all the schools?
That letter at 204thekids doesn't refute anything. It's just some email someone threw together because CFO posted the proof that the numbers given by the school aren't accurate.
|
|
