[UC-Announce] Wanted: Dog Runner
If anyone has one of those coated, braided cable with a pulley on the end that runs on another cable gizmos collecting dust on a shelf, I'll put it to good use. I have a high energy bitch. -Lew You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the list named UnivCity-Announce. To unsubscribe or for archive information, see http://www.purple.com/list.html. You may post announcements to this list, but this list attempts to prevent discussion. Please use univcity to discuss messages on this list. Subscribers of univcity receive all mail to this list.
Re: Common knowledge, was: [UC] IRS Treatment of third-party information
Such excitement over a simple question. Do you find a lot of intended meaning and purpose in my question? I must be very naughty. I bet if I did this constantly, I'd make people angry. Especially, if a group of idiots always picked up and ran with the intention of the loaded question.. This time, of course, my loaded question struck a nerve. I know it is the duty of all UCD cheerleaders to protect the cover-up of the Precious. As the Precious sinks deeper into the slime, I can really feel the desperation and anxiety. I feel for all of you. I don't have time for a proper literary criticism of your posts this morning. But I would like to come back and draw together your posts about the words, prisoner and hearsay. Now, we have the latest cheerleader confusion over a made up, then refuted, legal requirement for a non-profit organization to conduct itself honorably. You cheerleaders are probably correct, the Precious probably has no legal requirement to be honest or conduct itself honorably. Since I'm not a cheerleader, I'm not so excited or impressed with your refutation of nonsense. Long live the Precious, Your Buddy, the freedom fighter - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: UnivCity@list.purple.com Sent: Sunday, June 03, 2007 10:55 PM Subject: Common knowledge, was: [UC] IRS Treatment of third-party information I love how you complain about other poster's discourse, then use the same tactics you decry. First, you were victimized by ad hominem attacks but have no reluctance to use them on others. Today, you fuss about straw men and then adopt the method yourself. What Al said: 1) As a tax-exempt organization, the organization's policies and modus operandi are legally and morally a matter of public record and public concern. What I said: Can you share the citation to the law that makes non profit policies and MO's matters of public record? Al then provided the citation of law. Thanks Al. I'll try to look it up later. What you said: I thought it was common knowledge that non-profit organizations have to have written by laws with a written purpose filed with the IRS in order to be recognized and approved. Followed by the lay person's gem: Why on earth would you be asking for this requirement if you are a lawyer? What you told us earlier today: A straw man argument is an informal fallacy based on misrepresentation of an opponent's position. To set up a straw man or set up a straw-man argument is to create a position that is easy to refute, then attribute that position to the opponent. A straw-man argument can be a successful rhetorical technique (that is, it may succeed in persuading people) but it is in fact a misleading fallacy, because the opponent's actual argument has not been refuted. Earlier, you also suggested that no one had claimed UCD had done anything illegal. The fallacy? Misrepresenting my question as a suggestion that I didn't know what law requires non-profits to file bylaws with the IRS, or perhaps that I was insinuating that the current UCD cover up was the legal issue. (which, BTW, I don't know if your common knowledge is correct). My actual question: what law requires that the policies and MO's of a non profit be a matter of public record? Most interestingly, it sure sounds like you are criticizing me for asking a simple question to determine the bases for Al's assertion. Here we all thought you were fighting for freedom, democracy and public debate. Are you hoping to silence me? Is free speech just for you? What kind of buddy are you? Paul -Original Message- From: Glenn [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; UnivCity@list.purple.com Sent: Sun, 3 Jun 2007 8:32 pm Subject: Re: [UC] IRS Treatment of third-party information relating to tax-exempt organizations - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: UnivCity@list.purple.com Sent: Sunday, June 03, 2007 2:14 PM Subject: Fwd: [UC] IRS Treatment of third-party information relating to tax-exempt organizations Al, Can you share the citation to the law that makes non profit policies and MO's matters of public record? Thanks, Paul I'm confused by your question. I thought it was common knowledge that non-profit organizations have to have written by laws with a written purpose filed with the IRS in order to be recognized and approved. Why on earth would you be asking for this requirement if you are a lawyer? You could probably get this on an information sheet about the process for starting a non-profit. Someone might get confused about the legal issues here. You don't think that Al or anyone suggested that the current UCD cover-up was the legal issue? Are you really more interested in debating the word, policy, than getting your requested citation? I remember, you
Re: Common knowledge, was: [UC] IRS Treatment of third-party information
4) While we're all entitled to hold opinions, and to broadcast them -- sometimes ad hominem, sometimes ad nauseum -- via this list and other fora, no organization is beholden by law to care about them, let alone actually follow or respond to them. Don't you see how this stuff gets going? No one who I saw criticizing UCD ever claimed this legal requirement. Not even a remote suggestion of this! All the UCD blow hards jump up and down as if they just caught a murder after the nonsense gets started. I'm sorry you wasted time with this red herring. We had a similar strategy emerge recently over my own rather insightful usage of the word prisoner. Even if some lawyer had shown my usage to not be used properly and without insight, which didn't occur; it had nothing to do with the real and intended discussion. It was just an attempt to distract and confuse the actual points. Serendipitously, the work of engaging that list distraction helped me process my understanding of the violations to the 13th amendment since the courts can not order illegal work yet the probationers had the threat of incarceration when they worked for UCD. Once one understands the adversarial pattern that lured you in to this exchange, it is easy to see. The listserv is not a court of law and confusing witness strategies are probably not the best way to lead to a civil community discussion. Maybe, I'm wrong? Now, we have West calling citizens, wankers, in his assesment of Anglo-Norman jurisprudence. Congratulations to all involved for impressing Tony. - Original Message - From: Dave Axler [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; UnivCity@list.purple.com Sent: Sunday, June 03, 2007 11:30 PM Subject: Re: Common knowledge, was: [UC] IRS Treatment of third-party information I've just reviewed this discussion from the point where Al made the statement quoted below. I don't see any posts in which he provided the requested citation. If that was done off-list, I hope that it will be reposted for the benefit of all. Meanwhile, I'll take the liberty of driving the clue bus into the neighborhood and unloading some of its passengers: 1) An organization's By-Laws are not the same as its policies and modus operandi. The latter two are internal and not necessarily documented, let alone available as a part of the public record. 2) Talking about what is and isn't legally required to be a part of the public record is relevant. Talking about what is morally part of the public record is a matter of personal opinion, and is really only relevant if one is making a stand for changes in the legal requirements. 3) As for what is and isn't a matter of public concern, that's also a purely personal and individual opinion. 4) While we're all entitled to hold opinions, and to broadcast them -- sometimes ad hominem, sometimes ad nauseum -- via this list and other fora, no organization is beholden by law to care about them, let alone actually follow or respond to them. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: UnivCity@list.purple.com Sent: Sun, 3 Jun 2007 10:55 pm Subject: Common knowledge, was: [UC] IRS Treatment of third-party information What Al said: 1) As a tax-exempt organization, the organization's policies and modus operandi are legally and morally a matter of public record and public concern. What I said: Can you share the citation to the law that makes non profit policies and MO's matters of public record? Al then provided the citation of law. Thanks Al. I'll try to look it up later. What you said: I thought it was common knowledge that non-profit organizations have to have written by laws with a written purpose filed with the IRS in order to be recognized and approved. Followed by the lay person's gem: Why on earth would you be asking for this requirement if you are a lawyer? AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from AOL at AOL.com. You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the list named UnivCity. To unsubscribe or for archive information, see http://www.purple.com/list.html. -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.472 / Virus Database: 269.8.7/829 - Release Date: 6/2/2007 5:26 PM You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the list named UnivCity. To unsubscribe or for archive information, see http://www.purple.com/list.html.
[UC] Re: Common knowledge, was: [UC] IRS Treatment of third-party information
Paul, just to clarify ³A straw-man argument can be a successful rhetorical technique (that is, it may succeed in persuading people) but it is in fact a misleading fallacy,² Is that similar to chicanery? On 6/3/07 10:55 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I love how you complain about other poster's discourse, then use the same tactics you decry. First, you were victimized by ad hominem attacks but have no reluctance to use them on others. Today, you fuss about straw men and then adopt the method yourself. What Al said: 1) As a tax-exempt organization, the organization's policies and modus operandi are legally and morally a matter of public record and public concern. What I said: Can you share the citation to the law that makes non profit policies and MO's matters of public record? Al then provided the citation of law. Thanks Al. I'll try to look it up later. What you said: I thought it was common knowledge that non-profit organizations have to have written by laws with a written purpose filed with the IRS in order to be recognized and approved. Followed by the lay person's gem: Why on earth would you be asking for this requirement if you are a lawyer? What you told us earlier today: A straw man argument is an informal fallacy based on misrepresentation of an opponent's position. To set up a straw man or set up a straw-man argument is to create a position that is easy to refute, then attribute that position to the opponent. A straw-man argument can be a successful rhetorical technique (that is, it may succeed in persuading people) but it is in fact a misleading fallacy, because the opponent's actual argument has not been refuted. Earlier, you also suggested that no one had claimed UCD had done anything illegal. The fallacy? Misrepresenting my question as a suggestion that I didn't know what law requires non-profits to file bylaws with the IRS, or perhaps that I was insinuating that the current UCD cover up was the legal issue. (which, BTW, I don't know if your common knowledge is correct). My actual question: what law requires that the policies and MO's of a non profit be a matter of public record? Most interestingly, it sure sounds like you are criticizing me for asking a simple question to determine the bases for Al's assertion. Here we all thought you were fighting for freedom, democracy and public debate. Are you hoping to silence me? Is free speech just for you? What kind of buddy are you? Paul -Original Message- From: Glenn [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; UnivCity@list.purple.com Sent: Sun, 3 Jun 2007 8:32 pm Subject: Re: [UC] IRS Treatment of third-party information relating to tax-exempt organizations - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: UnivCity@list.purple.com Sent: Sunday, June 03, 2007 2:14 PM Subject: Fwd: [UC] IRS Treatment of third-party information relating to tax-exempt organizations Al, Can you share the citation to the law that makes non profit policies and MO's matters of public record? Thanks, Paul I'm confused by your question. I thought it was common knowledge that non-profit organizations have to have written by laws with a written purpose filed with the IRS in order to be recognized and approved. Why on earth would you be asking for this requirement if you are a lawyer? You could probably get this on an information sheet about the process for starting a non-profit. Someone might get confused about the legal issues here. You don't think that Al or anyone suggested that the current UCD cover-up was the legal issue? Are you really more interested in debating the word, policy, than getting your requested citation? I remember, you like to debate usage and semantics to attempt to confuse someone's point. I just read one of Cassidy's posts and now he seems confused too. Don't worry, I tried to help him understand that your question was nothing to get excited about. Your buddy, Glenn -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: UnivCity@list.purple.com Sent: Sat, 2 Jun 2007 7:46 pm Subject: [UC] IRS Treatment of third-party information relating to tax-exempt organizations UCD continues to be less than forthcoming about the internal investigation of its violation of the laws under which it operates as a tax-exempt organization. Namely through the use of its resources on behalf of a political candidate in the recent mayoral primary. Those of us who question the NID proposal by UCD, which includes UCD's management of what amounts to a QUANGO in the event it does happen to be formed, have been holding back on filing complaints with the IRS questioning UCD's tax-exempt status. While UCD
[UC] towing cars on 46th street
Cars are getting towed on 46th street, between Chester and Kingsessing, and I think north and south of that as well. There are two or three badly placed signs, and none at all on one side of the street, although they are towing on both sides. Just a word of warning in case you are parked there and were not aware of this (as indeed we weren't, until a neighbor let us know about this in time). For the next three days, I think. This is not going to be good for parking. You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the list named UnivCity. To unsubscribe or for archive information, see http://www.purple.com/list.html.
[UC] Dude, where's my car at? Redux
Roger, If your waiters are looking for their cars today, send them to the Clark Park empoundment yard. I suspect that there is road work being performed nearby. The wailing of parking breaks as the cars are dragged down the K-Way against their will really gets the dogs excited. -Lew You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the list named UnivCity. To unsubscribe or for archive information, see http://www.purple.com/list.html.
Re: [UC] towing cars on 46th street
On 6/4/07, Seth Kulick [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Cars are getting towed on 46th street, between Chester and Kingsessing, and I think north and south of that as well. There are two or three badly placed signs, and none at all on one side of the street, although they are towing on both sides. Just a word of warning in case you are parked there and were not aware of this (as indeed we weren't, until a neighbor let us know about this in time). I was shocked at the numbers of cars parked on 46th this morning as I headed out for my run at 5:30am. They'll spend more time towing cars then had they just knocked on everyone's door this morning to remind them. I did notice that there were far less signs on one side of the street and the ones on the other side just had the words Both sides scribbled on it. Lame. Parking will indeed suck, which is why I snagged a spot yesterday evening. Hopefully I won't need to move the car for a few days. At least USP isn't in session. -s You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the list named UnivCity. To unsubscribe or for archive information, see http://www.purple.com/list.html.
Re: Common knowledge, was: [UC] IRS Treatment of third-party information
In a message dated 6/3/2007 11:33:22 PM Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I've just reviewed this discussion from the point where Al made the statement quoted below. I don't see any posts in which he provided the requested citation. If that was done off-list, I hope that it will be reposted for the benefit of all. I thought I sent it to the whole list, but maybe the reply went just to Paul. At any rate, at the risk of being redundant, here's what I wrote: Sure. The cross-references and interpretations get fairly hairy (which is why some high-priced attorneys are high-priced attorneys) but the gist of it is in Section 6104 (Publicity of information required from certain exempt organizations and certain trusts) of the Internal Revenue Code -- aka _TITLE 26_ (http://www.fourmilab.ch/ustax/www/t26.html) , _Subtitle F_ (http://www.fourmilab.ch/ustax/www/t26-F.html) , _CHAPTER 61_ (http://www.fourmilab.ch/ustax/www/t26-F-61.html) , _Subchapter B_ (http://www.fourmilab.ch/ustax/www/t26-F-61-B.html) , Sec. 6104. It's there directly, by reference, and through associated case law. Al Krigman ** See what's free at http://www.aol.com.
Re: [UC] towing cars on 46th street
Actually USP is in summer session. I think some of the cars that were towed had their horns broken.I heard (from around the corner on Kingsessing) the sound of continuous honking as the sound moved away, more than once. I had a fantasy that someone was trapped in a car and trying to get out or get help but it went on to long for that to make sense. jim On 6/4/07, Shawn Medero [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 6/4/07, Seth Kulick [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Cars are getting towed on 46th street, between Chester and Kingsessing, and I think north and south of that as well. There are two or three badly placed signs, and none at all on one side of the street, although they are towing on both sides. Just a word of warning in case you are parked there and were not aware of this (as indeed we weren't, until a neighbor let us know about this in time). I was shocked at the numbers of cars parked on 46th this morning as I headed out for my run at 5:30am. They'll spend more time towing cars then had they just knocked on everyone's door this morning to remind them. I did notice that there were far less signs on one side of the street and the ones on the other side just had the words Both sides scribbled on it. Lame. Parking will indeed suck, which is why I snagged a spot yesterday evening. Hopefully I won't need to move the car for a few days. At least USP isn't in session. -s You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the list named UnivCity. To unsubscribe or for archive information, see http://www.purple.com/list.html. -- Jim Cummings You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the list named UnivCity. To unsubscribe or for archive information, see http://www.purple.com/list.html.
Re: [UC] towing cars on 46th street
Actually Springfield and Kingsessing. The signs have been up since last Wednesday, though many were taken down because a number of them were stapled to the trees. On 6/4/07, Seth Kulick [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Cars are getting towed on 46th street, between Chester and Kingsessing, and I think north and south of that as well. There are two or three badly placed signs, and none at all on one side of the street, although they are towing on both sides. Just a word of warning in case you are parked there and were not aware of this (as indeed we weren't, until a neighbor let us know about this in time). For the next three days, I think. This is not going to be good for parking. You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the list named UnivCity. To unsubscribe or for archive information, see http://www.purple.com/list.html.
[UC] Community Safety
Greetings All: Anyone interested in Community Safety issues please e-mail me off-list, I have some safety information to distribute and I would like to open a dialogue about what is going on block-to-block. Off-list. Thanks S
Re: [UC] towing cars on 46th street
My block was done last week. I thought that the continuous honking was the tow truck coming through warning everyone (twice). I only heard the honking when they started (6 am). Margie Actually USP is in summer session. I think some of the cars that were towed had their horns broken.I heard (from around the corner on Kingsessing) the sound of continuous honking as the sound moved away, more than once. I had a fantasy that someone was trapped in a car and trying to get out or get help but it went on to long for that to make sense. jim On 6/4/07, Shawn Medero [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 6/4/07, Seth Kulick [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Cars are getting towed on 46th street, between Chester and Kingsessing, and I think north and south of that as well. There are two or three badly placed signs, and none at all on one side of the street, although they are towing on both sides. Just a word of warning in case you are parked there and were not aware of this (as indeed we weren't, until a neighbor let us know about this in time). I was shocked at the numbers of cars parked on 46th this morning as I headed out for my run at 5:30am. They'll spend more time towing cars then had they just knocked on everyone's door this morning to remind them. I did notice that there were far less signs on one side of the street and the ones on the other side just had the words Both sides scribbled on it. Lame. Parking will indeed suck, which is why I snagged a spot yesterday evening. Hopefully I won't need to move the car for a few days. At least USP isn't in session. -s You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the list named UnivCity. To unsubscribe or for archive information, see http://www.purple.com/list.html. You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the list named UnivCity. To unsubscribe or for archive information, see http://www.purple.com/list.html.
[UC] Feel free to delete this message
Wow, I just deleted 11,366 messages! I wonder how they all got on my computer? Roger
Re: [UC] towing cars on 46th street
On 6/4/07, Margie Politzer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: My block was done last week. I thought that the continuous honking was the tow truck coming through warning everyone (twice). I only heard the honking when they started (6 am). I thought the continuous honking was the wankers flying south for the summer. If anyone wants a pleasant break from the rigors of reading this list and finding a parking spot, let me suggest going down to Ritz at the Bourse to see Paris, Je T'aime. It begins with a little vignette where the dude is driving around and around Montmartre trying to find a parking space. The other wouldbe parkers are remarkably polite - surprising they don't just haul out the heavy artillery and say it with shotguns like they do in New York. Anyway the dude finally finds a parking spot and is sitting there pondering his unhappy middleaged life when a mysterious woman faints beside his car. It goes on from there. -- Ross Bender http://rossbender.org/mqrtoc.html
Re: [UC] Feel free to delete this message
On 6/4/07, Vincent/Roger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Wow, I just deleted 11,366 messages! I wonder how they all got on my computer? Roger Oh man, how unfortunate! You deleted them by accident, right? I was savvy enough to back up my computer, so if you want this valuable material back, I can send them to you. -- Ross Bender http://rossbender.org/mqrtoc.html
[UC] RE: Crime solutions and PBS
Thanks, Glenn, I'll check this out. From: Glenn [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: KAREN ALLEN [EMAIL PROTECTED],UnivCity@list.purple.com CC: S. Sharrieff Ali [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Crime solutions and PBS Date: Sun, 3 Jun 2007 09:06:54 -0400 Hey Karen, Sharrieff, and others, We had a brief pre-election discussion on the list about crime reduction. This week on PBS, NOW, there was a very relevant piece with well-done coverage of the problem with recidivism and prison overcrowding. Here is the link to the description: http://www.pbs.org/now/shows/322/ It also covered an approach being piloted in Illinois that structures a sound attempt to rehabilitate interested prisoners. I think this Illinois program is put together with sound policies. The true costs to society for not making a well implemented intervention with inmates, matching services to an individual's real problems, are enormous. We have this crime problem yet we incarcerate an alarming number of our citizens. We incarcerate many of them multiple times. As far as I can tell, Nutter's policy proposal for re-employing ex-offenders is centered around tax breaks for employers. Maybe, I'm wrong? There was a federal tax incentive 10 years ago when I was developing a supported work program and network of potential employers. A rather large employer, with a business office, told me the program wasn't worth the effort. Yet he was quite pleased with the type of assistance we would be offering to those I refer to him. He was interested in workers showing up on time and knowing that if referrals had any trouble, that we would be helping them. He was very pleased to hire my referrals. Later, he told me some of these formerly high risk individuals were among his most valuable employees. We need this type of quality intervention for inmates to reduce recidivism. We need the political policy discussion to go beyond sound bites. I think the sound bite policies often take us in the wrong direction because they appeal so easily to destructive emotions like fear and anger. The tax break emphasis is a simple way to show a program that would appear welcomed by business, but I honestly believe it would fail to make a substantial impact. I hope Nutter could become an advocate for a much more comprehensive approach to crime than was discussed during the primary. More of us have to raise our voices and demand a more serious discussion to be outlined by politicians if we are ever going to move in a direction towards sound and civilized policies. Power to the people and power to reason. Hope everyone gets to check out the NOW program. Glenn You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the list named UnivCity. To unsubscribe or for archive information, see http://www.purple.com/list.html.
Re: [UC] towing cars on 46th street
What's even more lame? The bureaucracy of our streets department. Several days ago (when I noticed the signs) I had called the streets department to see what kind of scheduled street work was supposed to happen. I live on the 1100 block of S. 46th. After several attempts (6 different phone numbers with transferring in each and 45 minutes later), I was not much closer in figuring out what was going to happen. I was given the phone number of the contractor, and left a message with them. No response. I emailed the streets department and I am not holding my breath for a quick response from them either. The biggest issue I have is the stapling to the trees! It is illegal and the contractor should be fined for each tree! I have taken pictures of at least 4 trees and plan on sending them to whoever will listen. I did take down the one sign (in front of my own house yesterday) stapled to innocent tree! I am a tree tender and am horrified that these contractors get away with disobeying the law, especially when I know they can do it correctly. I also took a picture of a stake in the ground with the sign on it. Twine is also a good substitute to post on a tree without the use of staples or nails. The signs already have pre-punched out holes for that reason! Disgusted at unneeded work (IMO our block was fine- no pot holes or even cracks), Dan Myers On 6/4/07, Ross Bender [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 6/4/07, Margie Politzer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: My block was done last week. I thought that the continuous honking was the tow truck coming through warning everyone (twice). I only heard the honking when they started (6 am). I thought the continuous honking was the wankers flying south for the summer. If anyone wants a pleasant break from the rigors of reading this list and finding a parking spot, let me suggest going down to Ritz at the Bourse to see Paris, Je T'aime. It begins with a little vignette where the dude is driving around and around Montmartre trying to find a parking space. The other wouldbe parkers are remarkably polite - surprising they don't just haul out the heavy artillery and say it with shotguns like they do in New York. Anyway the dude finally finds a parking spot and is sitting there pondering his unhappy middleaged life when a mysterious woman faints beside his car. It goes on from there. -- Ross Bender http://rossbender.org/mqrtoc.html -- to the power of breathing, Dan Myers Intuitive Masseur 215.901.0899
[UC] Another Break-In Story
This past Sunday morning, at 5:00AM, our front door was broken in. The guy pried the astragal (the wood strip that covers the gap between a pair of wooded doors) off of the double doors, and then pried the latch plate (the non mechanical part of the deadbolt lock) by working some kind of a device slowly back and forth until all the screws were worked out. The little bit of noise he made doing that was just enough to alert our dogs. They didn't do a lot of barking, but were growling enough to wake Gary up. He went out into the first floor hall just as the guy (@ 5'6, early 20's , dark complexion) was opening the door. When he saw someone was up he took off, too quickly for Gary to remember much else as far as a description. The police did respond quickly, and then advised us not to repair anything or disturb the crime scene until we heard from West Dectectives. That Saturday night must have been busy, as they called and told us to repair the lock without their coming out to look at it. (not much to see- a lot os splinters, might have been fingerprints, but...nothing was taken, so...) We've reinstalled the lock, with some modifications. We've fasted the astragal with non removable screws. We're glad we paid attention to the dogs in the middle of the night, and glad that the burglary was interrupted. We're glad the 114 year-old doors were not irreparably damaged. There are lights on our porch, but our door is blocked from view on the east side by the wall off the old store front. Enough of a screen that the guy must have felt comfortable working on the door for a period of time, and just had to worry about looking over one shoulder. There's usually foot traffic on Baltimore Ave. long after the bars shut down. Fred Wolfe
RE: [UC] towing cars on 46th street
I was rather puzzled by this as well -- I'm no streets expert, but I walk along mine a fair amount and noticed no anomolies that looked like they'd require repaving. I imagine that every single tax dollar I've spent since I moved here wouldn't cover this. Where's our community input on this one? Where's our oversight? kc -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dan Myers Disgusted at unneeded work (IMO our block was fine- no pot holes or even cracks), Dan Myers You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the list named UnivCity. To unsubscribe or for archive information, see http://www.purple.com/list.html.
[UC] Unneeded Street Resurfacing
I am also disgusted at the unneeded work. My block (4600 Hazel) was perfect; it had been resurfaced not too long ago, maybe 2-3 years ago. There are lots of streets in the city that really need resurfacing. I also hope they don¹t try to trim the trees again this year. They¹ve been coming every year for the last few years. I spoke to the contractor last year. He didn¹t know why they were contracted for the same blocks year after year. Lots of other blocks need it much more than we do! And our trees can use some growing time. Margie Disgusted at unneeded work (IMO our block was fine- no pot holes or even cracks), Dan Myers
Re: [UC] towing cars on 46th street
I called Jannie Blackwell's office last week to complain about this waste of tax dollars and unnecessary inconvenience. They said they would get back to me; I am still waiting. Calls from other residents couldn't hurt... Margie I was rather puzzled by this as well -- I'm no streets expert, but I walk along mine a fair amount and noticed no anomolies that looked like they'd require repaving. I imagine that every single tax dollar I've spent since I moved here wouldn't cover this. Where's our community input on this one? Where's our oversight? kc -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dan Myers Disgusted at unneeded work (IMO our block was fine- no pot holes or even cracks), Dan Myers You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the list named UnivCity. To unsubscribe or for archive information, see http://www.purple.com/list.html.
Re: [UC] towing cars on 46th street
I say we all rebell by trying to enforce the fine to the contractor (I was told they are the ones responsible for putting up the signs). I think each occurrence can be up $100? Can someone look up the law? Can Kyle go down the entire stretch of 46th and take pictures of all the trees that have been abused? We are talking about at least $1000! Dan Myers (yes, I am still irate) I speak for trees, for the trees have no tongues --The Lorax, Dr. Seuss On 6/4/07, Kyle Cassidy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I was rather puzzled by this as well -- I'm no streets expert, but I walk along mine a fair amount and noticed no anomolies that looked like they'd require repaving. I imagine that every single tax dollar I've spent since I moved here wouldn't cover this. Where's our community input on this one? Where's our oversight? kc -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dan Myers Disgusted at unneeded work (IMO our block was fine- no pot holes or even cracks), Dan Myers -- to the power of breathing, Dan Myers Intuitive Masseur 215.901.0899
[UC] goodbye, John Fenton
Here's my take on complaining quickly to IRS about an UCD impropriety at the Malcolm X Park event is that such a complaint will plausibly result in pushing UCD to fire John Fenton in an effort to limit damage. Since both Glenn Moyer and Krigman Al have, if I recall correctly, have a positive attitude about John Fenton's activities in the neighborhood, I would think they might consider giving some more time, before blowing the whistle on UCD. I would also point out that it is hardly more than 3 weeks after the incident. Elliot Elliot M. Stern 552 South 48th Street Philadelphia, PA 19143-2029 United States of America telephone: 215-747-6204 mobile: 267-240-8418 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [UC] Kudos to Best Fest clean-up
The Best Fest gals are a coop house on Baltimore Ave. This is the third spring music festival they've coordinated, each time drawing rave reviews for low-key, high-quality shows that are smoothly and harmoniously coordinated. They are deeply in love with this neighborhood and contribute to its social life in many other ways, all positive. -- Tony West It's past 10:00 p.m. on Saturday night, there was a festival and large crowd in Clark Park in and around the bowl today, and there is a very quiet crew of people working their way around picking up every piece of trash, although from what we could see when we just came home, the park is already almost spotless. Trash bags are changed in every trash can, and the full bags neatly piled. I guess they're just going over the grounds again, making sure it's truely cleaned. Wow! So I say Kudos to the Best Fest folks. Naomi Segal Regent Square You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the list named UnivCity. To unsubscribe or for archive information, see http://www.purple.com/list.html.
Re: [UC] The UCD answer
Frank wrote: You're still not making sense. In the theoretical example *you* (not Ray) originally used, the decision about what content to teach was made by the agency, not by UCD. UCD's support would theoretically be forthcoming no matter what content was chosen. Any public complaint would have to be directed to the agency in question since UCD would be content-neutral. I'm going to repeat what I said before: You seem to be mired in traditional method of communication and to believe that they are the *only* way things work. Seriously, you use the word must more than anyone I can remember. You make pronouncements about the way things are which completely disregard different methods of communication than the ones, if I can presume, you work best in. Important decisions *do* get made without all of the parties involved talking face to face. I am reminded particularly of my involvement in Provincetown Community Television and the Provincetown Cable Advisory Board. Most of our negotiations, even controversial ones, with both Comcast and Outer Cape Television happened through email. The parties involved were just too geographically separate to be in the same place at the same time very often. I didn't know much when I started with them but I learned and eventually taught at our Community Television Station. yes, you get it. what I meant by ucd being neutral and not taking sides. in the example I cited, ucd took sides once the zoning question became a dispute among neighbors; gail fisher, as a ucd staffer, posted on phillyblog to support one side [apparently online communications ARE useful, SOME of the time :-)] this was all documented here, onlist, months ago. I pointed out at the time that ucd should have stepped aside once the zoning question became a dispute among neighbors before the zoning board, because ucd is not a stakeholder in the same way that the competing neighbors are. in response, melani pointed out that since ucd helped with getting dock street at the firehouse, we shouldn't expect ucd to be neutral. but when I asked her for particulars about how and when ucd helped dock street get installed at the firehouse, she did not answer [again, online communications are useful, some of the time :-)]. what I don't understand in all this is the expectation that we can have it both ways. we're supposed to accept how 'involved' ucd is in our public lives, but at the same time we're not supposed to look too closely, to ask too many questions. .. UNIVERSITY*CITOYEN [aka laserbeam®] [aka ray] SERIAL LIAR. CALL FOR RATES. __ This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System. For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email __ You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the list named UnivCity. To unsubscribe or for archive information, see http://www.purple.com/list.html.
RE: [UC] The UCD answer
I understand your position and I think very often UCD does stay out of the fray. But in the particular case of Dock Street I believe it goes back to your point of whom is UCD beholden to -- and as Sharrieff pointed out, UCD is beholden to the people who pay it's bills -- at the moment, that is not all the people of west philly. They're still a private entity until/unless the NID passes, in which case they'd be answerable to our citycouncil person. In the meantime, the people who are funding UCD have made it clear that getting businesses on Baltimore avenue is a priorty and they have created a special pool of money to do just that -- get businesses to open up along Baltimore Avenue. So with a clear mandate from the people who are funding them, and popular support among the people in the neighborhood (I recall someone from the zoning board saying the amount of community support for that particular business getting their variance was unprecidented in sheer size), they went ahead and sided with Dock Street over the Hickman Temple day care (which is my understanding, would have not been a public day care, but rather one for the church only). If two neighbors were arguing over what color their semi-detatched should be painted, I expect that UCD would not get involved or if there were a rich debate about the borders of the Catchman zone, I'd likewise expect them not to pick a side, but in this instance, I think they acted properly in accordance with the wishes of their funders. (Who include, to some small extent, me, since I've sent them money and I'm happy with their position on Dock Street). kc -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of UNIVERSITY*CITOYEN in the example I cited, ucd took sides once the zoning question became a dispute among neighbors; gail fisher, as a ucd staffer, posted on phillyblog to support one side [apparently online communications ARE useful, SOME of the time :-)] this was all documented here, onlist, months ago. You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the list named UnivCity. To unsubscribe or for archive information, see http://www.purple.com/list.html.
RE: [UC] towing cars on 46th street
I was trying not to see this as some possible form of mismanagement and corruption. Because I'm an optomistic guy. But it smells a little like Haliburton to me. Of course, I know _NOTHING_ about road surfacing, so this is a total lay person's perspective. The road could have been ready to explode dangerously. But as a lay person, were I asked where can we spend $100,000 in your neighborhood? This would have come to mind somewhere south of new hats for Omar. Kyle may not have been entirely serious, but yes, where is our input and oversight on this? You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the list named UnivCity. To unsubscribe or for archive information, see http://www.purple.com/list.html.
Al Krigman's plan [was: Re: [UC] g oodbye, John Fenton]
In a message dated 6/4/07 11:42:48 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Here's my take on complaining quickly to IRS about an UCD impropriety at the Malcolm X Park event is that such a complaint will plausibly result in pushing UCD to fire John Fenton in an effort to limit damage. Since both Glenn Moyer and Krigman Al have, if I recall correctly, have a positive attitude about John Fenton's activities in the neighborhood, I would think they might consider giving some more time, before blowing the whistle on UCD. I would also point out that it is hardly more than 3 weeks after the incident. Elliot My bet is that Al Krigman is so eager to keep a few of his dollars from funding the clean safe initiatives in University City that he is delighted to force this issue. Al's threatening all sorts of actions if something BIG doesn't happen when the investigation is finished. I'll bet that he'd be delighted to force UCD to fire John Fenton, if it turns out that John authorized the use of UCD and court-assigned workers to set up for a Knox rally.Since John is popular, Al knows that his firing would get a bunch of people mad at the UCD. Then Al would be able to try to recruit John's supporters to join his anti-UCD crusade. And it wouldn't stop there. Although John has been a capable and independent worker, in charge of his department, Al keeps insinuating that his orders must have come from above on thisfrom the person whose name Al always writes backwards, showing his disdain loudly and clearly. Al will continue with the assertion that the UCD director micromanages all, and will continue to assert that all of UCD is in need of being disbanded. Al suggested that we all wait to judge, but he hasn't followed his own advice. In email after email he's prejudged the UCD. Don't fall for his rhetoric, don't fall for his attempt to discredit an entire organization so he can save a few dollars. Very few - the cost to him would not be high, now that he's told us that he's sold many of his properties. He's just having fun with this; he's just trying to take down the UCD because he thinks he can. That's Philadelphia politics - doesn't it just make you sick? Melani Lamond Melani Lamond, Associate Broker Urban Bye, Realtor 3529 Lancaster Ave. Philadelphia, PA 19104 cell phone 215-356-7266 office phone 215-222-4800, ext. 113 office fax 215-222-1101 ** See what's free at http://www.aol.com.
Re: [UC] The UCD answer
In a message dated 6/4/07 12:52:30 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: what I don't understand in all this is the expectation that we can have it both ways. we're supposed to accept how 'involved' ucd is in our public lives, but at the same time we're not supposed to look too closely, to ask too many questions. Ray, each community association has a representative on the board of the UCD. There is one for Spruce Hill and one for Walnut Hill, both covering areas near your apartment. If you don't like what the UCD is doing, go to the community associations and ask them to exercise better oversight. Melani Lamond Melani Lamond, Associate Broker Urban Bye, Realtor 3529 Lancaster Ave. Philadelphia, PA 19104 cell phone 215-356-7266 office phone 215-222-4800, ext. 113 office fax 215-222-1101 ** See what's free at http://www.aol.com.
[UC] Re: Al Krigman's plan [was: Re: [U C] goodbye, John Fenton]
In a message dated 6/4/2007 2:13:48 PM Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: My bet is that Al Krigman blah blah blah Wow! Nasty. Krigman Al ** See what's free at http://www.aol.com.
[UC] Urgent -- How to say Thank You in a Classy Fashion
I need to say Thanks for the mad props in a classy fashion on another list, but can't think of a better way to say thanks. Any help? -- Ross Bender http://rossbender.org
Re: [UC] Urgent -- How to say Thank You in a Classy Fashion
Take it to culture - you won't find 'classy fashion' here... Regards, John Ellingsworth Ross Bender wrote: I need to say Thanks for the mad props in a classy fashion on another list, but can't think of a better way to say thanks. Any help? You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the list named UnivCity. To unsubscribe or for archive information, see http://www.purple.com/list.html.
Re: [UC] Urgent -- How to say Thank You in a Classy Fashion
Well, no thanks to the readers of this list, but I found the phrase Thanks for rolling with a brother! in the Urban Dictionary, and it fitted my purpose almost to the T. On 6/4/07, John Ellingsworth [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Take it to culture - you won't find 'classy fashion' here... Regards, John Ellingsworth Ross Bender wrote: I need to say Thanks for the mad props in a classy fashion on another list, but can't think of a better way to say thanks. Any help? -- Ross Bender http://rossbender.org
Re: Al Krigman's plan [was: Re: [UC] goodbye, John Fenton]
On 6/4/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: * * That's Philadelphia politics - doesn't it just make you sick? Oh my goodness, yes!! In fact, it made me so sick that I was overcome with the vapors, and had to retire to my cork-lined room where I have been indisposed all afternoon, holding a perfumed handkerchief to my temples! -- Ross Bender http://rossbender.org/mqrtoc.html
Re: Al Krigman's plan [was: Re: [UC] goodbye, John Fenton]
On 6/4/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: * * That's Philadelphia politics - doesn't it just make you sick? Oh my goodness, yes!! In fact, it made me so sick that I was overcome with the vapors, and had to retire to my cork-lined room where I have been indisposed all afternoon, holding a perfumed handkerchief to my temples! -- Ross Bender http://rossbender.org/mqrtoc.html
Re: [UC] towing cars on 46th street
Did the towing guys rip the branch off the tree at 46th and Baltimore in retaliation? If so, I'll never tear a sign off a tree again. -Lew From: B Andersen [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: B Andersen [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: UnivCity@list.purple.com Subject: Re: [UC] towing cars on 46th street Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2007 09:03:41 -0400 Actually Springfield and Kingsessing. The signs have been up since last Wednesday, though many were taken down because a number of them were stapled to the trees. On 6/4/07, Seth Kulick [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Cars are getting towed on 46th street, between Chester and Kingsessing, and I think north and south of that as well. There are two or three badly placed signs, and none at all on one side of the street, although they are towing on both sides. Just a word of warning in case you are parked there and were not aware of this (as indeed we weren't, until a neighbor let us know about this in time). For the next three days, I think. This is not going to be good for parking. You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the list named UnivCity. To unsubscribe or for archive information, see http://www.purple.com/list.html. You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the list named UnivCity. To unsubscribe or for archive information, see http://www.purple.com/list.html.
Re: [UC] towing cars on 46th street
Actually the towing guys were really cool this morning. They were very engaging of the neighbors who were our and very helpful as we tried to get more neighbors up to move their own cars. I also noticed that the street workers seem to have swerved around a large tree with low branches, on the 1000 block of S 46th. So perhaps there's hope that they will listen to arguments against stapling signs to trees. Good luck, Stephen On 6/4/07, Lewis Mellman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Did the towing guys rip the branch off the tree at 46th and Baltimore in retaliation? If so, I'll never tear a sign off a tree again. -Lew From: B Andersen [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: B Andersen [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: UnivCity@list.purple.com Subject: Re: [UC] towing cars on 46th street Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2007 09:03:41 -0400 Actually Springfield and Kingsessing. The signs have been up since last Wednesday, though many were taken down because a number of them were stapled to the trees. On 6/4/07, Seth Kulick [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Cars are getting towed on 46th street, between Chester and Kingsessing, and I think north and south of that as well. There are two or three badly placed signs, and none at all on one side of the street, although they are towing on both sides. Just a word of warning in case you are parked there and were not aware of this (as indeed we weren't, until a neighbor let us know about this in time). For the next three days, I think. This is not going to be good for parking. You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the list named UnivCity. To unsubscribe or for archive information, see http://www.purple.com/list.html. You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the list named UnivCity. To unsubscribe or for archive information, see http://www.purple.com/list.html. -- -- University City Yoga http://www.ucyoga.com
[UC] The Call of the Wanker
I thought the continuous honking was the wankers flying south for the summer. Bender circa 2007 When I first heard in the distance, that sound emanating from the upscale orchestra pit at Clark Park; I wondered, is this the infamous mating call of the Friends of Corporate Plutocracy? Later a report from the chief of the UCD whacko squad revealed that it was the wanker, a specie closely related to the whores, drug addicts, and Trustafarians of West Philadelphia. That revelation became, perhaps, the greatest news of this savage's life! When I again heard that sweet, sweet, music soar above the wawa of the goose, wank-wank-wank: I fell into a deep trance and like any devil allied wild beast, I answered with complete obedience, the call of my flock A free and soaring wanker, Moyer Glenn
Re: [UC] towing cars on 46th street
Well, DON¹T quote, but I was under the impression that City Streets wee the domain of PENNDOT and NOT the Department of Streets. The Department of Streets I thought was purpose of Sanitation, Trash Collection, Snow Removal and perhaps Emergency repairs. Philly Streets are still considered State Roads. Does anyone have knew info? On 6/4/07 5:57 PM, Doc Baldy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Actually the towing guys were really cool this morning. They were very engaging of the neighbors who were our and very helpful as we tried to get more neighbors up to move their own cars. I also noticed that the street workers seem to have swerved around a large tree with low branches, on the 1000 block of S 46th. So perhaps there's hope that they will listen to arguments against stapling signs to trees. Good luck, Stephen On 6/4/07, Lewis Mellman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Did the towing guys rip the branch off the tree at 46th and Baltimore in retaliation? If so, I'll never tear a sign off a tree again. -Lew From: B Andersen [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: B Andersen [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: UnivCity@list.purple.com Subject: Re: [UC] towing cars on 46th street Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2007 09:03:41 -0400 Actually Springfield and Kingsessing. The signs have been up since last Wednesday, though many were taken down because a number of them were stapled to the trees. On 6/4/07, Seth Kulick [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Cars are getting towed on 46th street, between Chester and Kingsessing, and I think north and south of that as well. There are two or three badly placed signs, and none at all on one side of the street, although they are towing on both sides. Just a word of warning in case you are parked there and were not aware of this (as indeed we weren't, until a neighbor let us know about this in time). For the next three days, I think. This is not going to be good for parking. You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the list named UnivCity. To unsubscribe or for archive information, see http://www.purple.com/list.html http://www.purple.com/list.html . You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the list named UnivCity. To unsubscribe or for archive information, see http://www.purple.com/list.html http://www.purple.com/list.html .
Re: [UC] Urgent -- How to say Thank You in a Classy Fashion
Ross Bender wrote: I need to say Thanks for the mad props in a classy fashion on another list, but can't think of a better way to say thanks. Any help? -- Merci bien? You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the list named UnivCity. To unsubscribe or for archive information, see http://www.purple.com/list.html.
Re: [UC] Urgent -- How to say Thank You in a Classy Fashion
On 6/4/07, Brian Siano [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Ross Bender wrote: I need to say Thanks for the mad props in a classy fashion on another list, but can't think of a better way to say thanks. Any help? -- Merci bien? Hmm. Well, I suppose it's a trifle classier than Thanks, bitch. -- Ross Bender http://rossbender.org/mqrtoc.html
Re: [UC] Urgent -- How to say Thank You in a Classy Fashion
³Don¹t look at ME when you say that!² On 6/4/07 7:14 PM, Ross Bender [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 6/4/07, Brian Siano [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Ross Bender wrote: I need to say Thanks for the mad props in a classy fashion on another list, but can't think of a better way to say thanks. Any help? -- Merci bien? Hmm. Well, I suppose it's a trifle classier than Thanks, bitch.
RE: [UC] Urgent -- How to say Thank You in a Classy Fashion
I believe Ross was addressing Lewis Mellman's dog. _ From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Wilma de Soto Sent: Monday, June 04, 2007 7:42 PM To: Ross Bender; Brian Siano Cc: UnivCity listserv Subject: Re: [UC] Urgent -- How to say Thank You in a Classy Fashion Don't look at ME when you say that! On 6/4/07 7:14 PM, Ross Bender [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 6/4/07, Brian Siano [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Ross Bender wrote: I need to say Thanks for the mad props in a classy fashion on another list, but can't think of a better way to say thanks. Any help? -- Merci bien? Hmm. Well, I suppose it's a trifle classier than Thanks, bitch.
Fwd: [UC] towing cars on 46th street
??? The milling machine is really tall, and has to start out right next to the curb.? At least one of the branches at that corner was sawed off.? Perhaps it was evident that there was no way the machine could roll past those trees without doing even more damage. Paul -Original Message- From: Lewis Mellman [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: UnivCity@list.purple.com Sent: Mon, 4 Jun 2007 3:41 pm Subject: Re: [UC] towing cars on 46th street Did the towing guys rip the branch off the tree at 46th and Baltimore in retaliation?? If so, I'll never tear a sign off a tree again.? -Lew? ? From: B Andersen [EMAIL PROTECTED]? Reply-To: B Andersen [EMAIL PROTECTED]? To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [UC] towing cars on 46th street? Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2007 09:03:41 -0400? ? Actually Springfield and Kingsessing.? ? The signs have been up since last Wednesday, though many were taken down? because a number of them were stapled to the trees.? ? ? On 6/4/07, Seth Kulick [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:? ? ? Cars are getting towed on 46th street, between Chester and Kingsessing,? and? I think north and south of that as well. There are two or three badly? placed? signs, and none at all on one side of the street, although they are towing? on? both sides. Just a word of warning in case you are parked there and were? not aware of this (as indeed we weren't, until a neighbor let us know? about? this in time).? ? For the next three days, I think. This is not going to be good for? parking.? ? ? You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the? list named UnivCity. To unsubscribe or for archive information, see? http://www.purple.com/list.html.? ? ? ? You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the? list named UnivCity. To unsubscribe or for archive information, see? http://www.purple.com/list.html.? AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from AOL at AOL.com.
Fwd: [UC] towing cars on 46th street
Beg to differ Ms. O.C. Most city streets are city streets. I think PennDOT only covers state highways in the city, which can be recognized by their route numbers like 3, 13 and 611. Whether maintenance of the city streets is the province of the Streets Dept or the Highway Dept I know not. Curious people could check out phila.gov to get the answer. Paul 7 -Original Message- From: Wilma de Soto [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Doc Baldy [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Lewis Mellman [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: UnivCity listserv UnivCity@list.purple.com Sent: Mon, 4 Jun 2007 6:40 pm Subject: Re: [UC] towing cars on 46th street Well, DON’T quote, but I was under the impression that City Streets wee the domain of PENNDOT and NOT the Department of Streets. The Department of Streets I thought was purpose of Sanitation, Trash Collection, Snow Removal and perhaps Emergency repairs. Philly Streets are still considered State Roads. Does anyone have knew info? On 6/4/07 5:57 PM, Doc Baldy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Actually the towing guys were really cool this morning. They were very engaging of the neighbors who were our and very helpful as we tried to get more neighbors up to move their own cars. I also noticed that the street workers seem to have swerved around a large tree with low branches, on the 1000 block of S 46th. So perhaps there's hope that they will listen to arguments against stapling signs to trees. Good luck, Stephen On 6/4/07, Lewis Mellman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Did the towing guys rip the branch off the tree at 46th and Baltimore in retaliation? If so, I'll never tear a sign off a tree again. -Lew From: B Andersen [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: B Andersen [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: UnivCity@list.purple.com Subject: Re: [UC] towing cars on 46th street Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2007 09:03:41 -0400 Actually Springfield and Kingsessing. The signs have been up since last Wednesday, though many were taken down because a number of them were stapled to the trees. On 6/4/07, Seth Kulick [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Cars are getting towed on 46th street, between Chester and Kingsessing, and I think north and south of that as well. There are two or three badly placed signs, and none at all on one side of the street, although they are towing on both sides. Just a word of warning in case you are parked there and were not aware of this (as indeed we weren't, until a neighbor let us know about this in time). For the next three days, I think. This is not going to be good for parking. You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the list named UnivCity. To unsubscribe or for archive information, see http://www.purple.com/list.html http://www.purple.com/list.html . You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the list named UnivCity. To unsubscribe or for archive information, see http://www.purple.com/list.html http://www.purple.com/list.html . AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from AOL at AOL.com.
Re: [UC] The UCD answer
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Ray, each community association has a representative on the board of the UCD. There is one for Spruce Hill and one for Walnut Hill, both covering areas near your apartment. If you don't like what the UCD is doing, go to the community associations and ask them to exercise better oversight. sorry, resorting to ad hominem here isn't helpful. this isn't about me or what you assume about me. it's about you or any of us being able to say when and how ucd helped dock street get installed at the firehouse -- regardless of how we like what ucd is doing, regardless of what neighborhood association we ask. .. UNIVERSITY*CITOYEN [aka laserbeam®] [aka ray] SERIAL LIAR. CALL FOR RATES. You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the list named UnivCity. To unsubscribe or for archive information, see http://www.purple.com/list.html.
Re: [UC] The UCD answer
Kyle Cassidy wrote: I understand your position and I think very often UCD does stay out of the fray. But in the particular case of Dock Street I believe it goes back to your point of whom is UCD beholden to -- and as Sharrieff pointed out, UCD is beholden to the people who pay it's bills -- at the moment, that is not all the people of west philly. They're still a private entity until/unless the NID passes, in which case they'd be answerable to our citycouncil person. In the meantime, the people who are funding UCD have made it clear that getting businesses on Baltimore avenue is a priorty and they have created a special pool of money to do just that -- get businesses to open up along Baltimore Avenue. So with a clear mandate from the people who are funding them, and popular support among the people in the neighborhood (I recall someone from the zoning board saying the amount of community support for that particular business getting their variance was unprecidented in sheer size), they went ahead and sided with Dock Street over the Hickman Temple day care (which is my understanding, would have not been a public day care, but rather one for the church only). If two neighbors were arguing over what color their semi-detatched should be painted, I expect that UCD would not get involved or if there were a rich debate about the borders of the Catchman zone, I'd likewise expect them not to pick a side, but in this instance, I think they acted properly in accordance with the wishes of their funders. (Who include, to some small extent, me, since I've sent them money and I'm happy with their position on Dock Street). thanks kyle. (and thanks for not resorting to ad hominem.) consider this: if a majority of folks in the hood were pro-Nutter, and these same folks also happened to be contributing money to ucd, that would not make it right for ucd to publicly endorse Nutter, to encourage voters to vote for Nutter. the choice for Nutter or not is a public choice, a public process among equal stakeholders. that's why in my example I took care to say 'public questions/disputes', why I said ucd should have been neutral once the zoning question became a public dispute among neighbors before the zoning board. so, how would you revise this: - - - - - - - idea #5: ucd should remain scrupulously neutral in public questions/disputes/contests, not taking sides or even appearing to take sides. - - - - - - - .. UNIVERSITY*CITOYEN [aka laserbeam®] [aka ray] SERIAL LIAR. CALL FOR RATES. You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the list named UnivCity. To unsubscribe or for archive information, see http://www.purple.com/list.html.
Re: [UC] Delay and old news tactic
Bill Sanderson wrote: You're right, I guess. They had an incident which involved personnel policies--did an employee do the right (or the wrong) thing. No organization I've ever run into is going to handle such a thing in public--would you expect there to be broad neighborhood publicity if this were you, and your employer? yes, penn does handle this kind of thing -- look at the amy gutmann holloween incident. it broke out on someone's blog (not the newspapers), spread throughout the media, and penn very quickly issued a statement and posted it on their website. it was the right thing to do, the responsible thing to do. Presumably, at some point, John Fenton's employment status will change--he'll go back to work, or otherwise. Whether anyone will announce that to the world, I don't know, but I don't expect to see it emblazoned on any headlines. see, that's just it: all we've heard thus far (publicly) is headlines. meanwhile some in the neighborhood have heard wendell deliver a statement at a meeting, and the daily news has shifted the 'story' (removing/distancing fenton and magnifying blackwell) while not publishing ucd's full official statement... up next: more headlines?... .. UNIVERSITY*CITOYEN [aka laserbeam®] [aka ray] SERIAL LIAR. CALL FOR RATES. You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the list named UnivCity. To unsubscribe or for archive information, see http://www.purple.com/list.html.
[UC] ad hominem redivivum
Now Ray thinks ad hominem means *any* attempt to address him personally during a discussion.. Notice how Ray, whenever possible, uses the communal we. Ray dreams of holding a unique authority to publish as Mr. We, His Community's Voice. Lewis Wendell, who also lives in the neighborhood and actually accomplishes things, is never we; Ray allows only Ray to be we. Plainly in this case, Ray, anything you can do, as Melani suggested, the rest of us can do also. If we want to know when and how UCD helped Dock Street get installed in the Firehouse, we can talk courteously and directly to the principals about their business. I have done some of that, and while I still may not know The Whole Truth, I know more than you do. I notice two things about your internet-only methodology: (1) you are abnormally rigid and limited in your approach to learning, unlike most people who probe subjects that matter to them; (2) you endlessly complain you don't understand what's going on. Your two problems are related. They are not our problems; they are yours. Point of fact. -- Tony West [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Ray, each community association has a representative on the board of the UCD. There is one for Spruce Hill and one for Walnut Hill, both covering areas near your apartment. If you don't like what the UCD is doing, go to the community associations and ask them to exercise better oversight. sorry, resorting to ad hominem here isn't helpful. this isn't about me or what you assume about me. it's about you or any of us being able to say when and how ucd helped dock street get installed at the firehouse -- regardless of how we like what ucd is doing, regardless of what neighborhood association we ask. [aka ray] You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the list named UnivCity. To unsubscribe or for archive information, see http://www.purple.com/list.html.
Re: [UC] The UCD answer
Organizations in UCD's class are prohibited from supporting specific political candidates directly (indirectly, or in appearance, etc. is not prohibited and is widespread). Therefore, it would be wrong for it to support Nutter. Organizations in UCD's class are not prohibited from taking sides in a business improvement dispute. Indeed, their very mission requires them to take sides in saying some business-district situations are more improved, others are less improved. And since commerce is profoundly competitive, with one merchant's meat being another merchant's poison, BIDs are always fated to muddy their fingers with controversy. If you think they should all be exterminated, like the smallpox virus, then proceed! But it's unreasonable to pretend to allow them to live, yet insist they avoid all controversy. Given that UCD is a BID, not a community government, I would expect it to facilitate businesses in the community and to take their side in disputes. When it has to choose between businesses, then it must choose. But that can scarcely be a choice that non-funding non-businesses have any right to dictate! -- Tony West Kyle wrote: If two neighbors were arguing over what color their semi-detatched should be painted, I expect that UCD would not get involved or if there were a rich debate about the borders of the Catchman zone, I'd likewise expect them not to pick a side, but in this instance, I think they acted properly in accordance with the wishes of their funders. (Who include, to some small extent, me, since I've sent them money and I'm happy with their position on Dock Street). Ray wrote: consider this: if a majority of folks in the hood were pro-Nutter, and these same folks also happened to be contributing money to ucd, that would not make it right for ucd to publicly endorse Nutter, to encourage voters to vote for Nutter. the choice for Nutter or not is a public choice, a public process among equal stakeholders. that's why in my example I took care to say 'public questions/disputes', why I said ucd should have been neutral once the zoning question became a public dispute among neighbors before the zoning board. You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the list named UnivCity. To unsubscribe or for archive information, see http://www.purple.com/list.html.
