Melani Lamond wrote:
To some extent, I think folks in UC tend to
support or oppose change based on the identity of the
entity proposing the change, rather than on the merit of
the proposal. I think there may be some of that
happening here, and I think it's unfortunate. As I
wrote, I support preserving and restoring the building -
and if this project will allow for that, I think the
project has merit and should be considered.
KAREN ALLEN wrote:
I agree that people use identity as the basis of support,
but that bias runs in favor of Penn and its surrogates.
Imagine the outrage if some Average Joe (or Josephine)
tried to enclose a porch or brick up a window, or use
those dreaded Home Depot spindles. Only the one building
would be affected. Here, Penn and its surrogate wants to
build a ten story building to tower over everything
around it, while being totally out of character with
other buildings, and those same critics see nothing wrong
with that.
sorry, I misattributed quotes in my previous post. the above
is what I meant to quote. (my mail reader at home isn't set
up to distinguish between plain and bold text)
..................
UNIVERSITY*CITOYEN
[aka laserbeam®]
[aka ray]
SERIAL LIAR. CALL FOR RATES.
"It is very clear on this listserve who
these people are. Ray has admitted being
connected to this forger." -- Tony West
"Ray's falsehoods are more sophisticated,
more believable" -- Tony West
----
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>.
