Wilma,
I always answer every question that is addressed me. It's a courtesy
fundamental to honest discussion. Like your own discussion habits, which
are admirable and which I too try to follow, hopefully as well as you
someday.
1) I have learned many things and indeed just posted a request for more
information. Since I never post a request for more rhetoric, or for more
misfits, assume I respect your history.
2) I really read it and honestly considered it. Your experiences sound
valid. Other people's experiences may sound equally valid, yet be
different. That's why I'd like to hear more voices, without prejudging
anybody's perspectives.
3) Between the CPN/Firehouse contretemps of 1988 and the SHCA/Campus Inn
contretemps of 2008, there are some obvious parallels, but maybe a few
more obvious differences. Both are true.
4) I have no idea what positions I agree or disagree with. I don't deny
any scenarios at this time, now you've kindly given us a lucid account
of yours. Your material can be fact-checked by the entire community,
thanks. But remember: name-calling makes fact-checking harder, not
easier, for the community.
5) Yes, hurt feelings! I see this constantly in the group I work with
and it always pains me, so I know they have stung many other decent,
goodhearted neighbors. It has nothing to do with your ideology or your
faction; it mostly has to do with small-group dynamics.
6) Not at all. Readers just need referrals to them, thanks.
-- Tony West
MY questions to one as erudite as you are:
• Have you EVER learned ANYTHING from this “fascinating history”, or
just continue to blow it off as rhetoric of misfits?
• Have you EVER really read it and honestly considered it or have you
just invalidated the experiences of those who were affected?
• Are you truly able to make the mental cognitive synapse connections
between what we and others have written about this “fascinating
history” and note the similarities to the present Campus Inn situation?
• Although you may not agree with these positions, would you still
deny the stated scenarios took place in face of repeated written
accounts of those who took the side of the community and were punished?
• Could you acknowledge there might be hurt feelings by those who may
have supported the various UC community groups’ agendas before, but
NOW find themselves without “Friends” now that it affects them?
• Do you deny there are accounts of public record, i.e. UC Review and
minutes of SHCA and CPN that buffet these arguments?
Whenever I post on this listserv about controversial community issues,
I try to present my opinions using the facts as I know them.
When someone makes an assertion I do not know, or proves me wrong with
the facts, I have publicly said I stand corrected or apologized if I
was brusque or in error.
I request publicly you answer my questions or just the first one would
be enough.
----
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>.
