[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You've got a pretty poor standard of definition, then. That "poll" wasn't so much a poll as a petition. It was distributed not to Spruce Hill as a whole, but to the membership of the SHCA. It was accompanied with two long documents: a statement from the SHCA supporting the designation, and an FAQ compiled by the SHCA. This is a bit like going into a Baptist church, and asking people if they supported President Bush against the terrorists, or wanted John Kerry to weaken our country's defenses. It was not a poll by any reasonable measure.I'm too busy to expend the effort to prove the point - again. After all, it has already been documented by the Spruce Hill poll.
There was no indication that any substantive or principled opposition even existed beyond Al Krigman. Melani's earlier note plays along this cheap propaganda as well. Notice that, even though she's well aware that Sharrieff Ali, Liz Campion and I are among the proposal's critics, she only refers to Al Krigman. Why? Because then it's in the SHCA's interest to portray this as a matter of decent preservationists versus one cranky landlord. The fact that many of us disagree with Al, and have said so in the past, is also one of those troublesome facts which the HD dvocates simply cannot admit or acknowledge.
They never acknowledge that there are good, substantive reasons to be critical of the proposal as well as the designation process itself. For example, Melani and others denounce Councilwoman Blackwell's task force as a bad-faith effort, rather than an attempt to evaluate a problematic and un-democratic process.
---- 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>.
