Jim Graham wrote: > ...I find Michael Atherton's post so filled with sour grapes that > it puckers my mind just reading it.
David Brauer wrote: > Frankly, I find the demonizing of disagreement to be particularly > distasteful. It seems like so much of our civic discussion > lately does not recognize legitimate differences of opinion - > someone must be corrupt, or selfish. Terrell Brown wrote: > I'm not willing to demonize my neighbors who have a different view > on a subject than I do. These responses to my post are interesting given that they assume that I was upset about the proposals. I am not upset about the proposals. The majority of funds, approximately 80%, was allocated to our local community school. I am strongly in favor of community schools as long as per pupil spending is equivalent to other parts of the city. No, what I am upset about is the PROCESS, not the particular outcomes. It's the same issue that I've been raising here since I began posting about the NRP more than two years ago. It is also interesting that these posts seem to imply that being upset or angry diminishes the credibility of one's experience or the value of their opinion. But, this isn't "Leave it To Beaver" and it's no longer the 1950s when emotions were left out of polite conversation. I believe that in order to understand the worthiness of someone's perspective you need to know what lead up to their emotional state, not to claim that a person's emotional state invalidates their viewpoint. I believe that my original post in this thread identified general problems with the reallocation process, and my second post dealt with more specific details. I don't believe that this is "sour grapes," "the demonizing of disagreement," nor am I "demonizing my neighbors because they have a different view." I am criticizing my neighbors because I believe that they were complicit in an unfair and biased process. And as I have repeated pointed out, some inherent aspects and the current policies of the NRP engender these types of negative interactions. My next post will be more specific. For the moment I want to emphasizes that the posts quoted here do not seem to me to deal directly with the issues I raised, but rather border on character assassination. I have repeatedly asked NRP representatives and supporters to address specific questions, but I haven't gotten direct responses. And, as I pointed out in a previous post: Minnesota Niceness seems to be used to suppress opposition, not only during NRP meetings, but now here as well. Michael Atherton Prospect Park TEMPORARY REMINDER: 1. Send all posts in plain-text format. 2. Cut as much of the post you're responding to as possible. ________________________________ Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest, and more: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
