[Winona Online Democracy]
A couple questions for someone who posts here often... Mr. Keith Nelson,
Asst. Winona City Manager
Thank you for providing me a copy of the Pinnacle report this week.... which
I am attempting to understand. The City of Winona charged me 20 cents per
page though... which seems like double the market value for a photocopy....
what is up with that? Is that the standard charge for anyone requesting
copies of documentation from the City of Winona? Do some folks get free
copies? Also, can you tell me why the Pinnacle Company was engaged in this
exercise by the City of Winona and how much the City paid for this report?
David H DeLano
----- Original Message -----
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, July 29, 2005 12:00 PM
Subject: Winona Digest, Vol 19, Issue 22
Send Winona mailing list submissions to
[email protected]
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://www.mnforum.org/mailman/listinfo/winona
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can reach the person managing the list at
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of Winona digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. Concerning my study (Steve Schild Winona Online Democracy)
2. Re: understanding now ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
3. RE: Re: [Winona] understanding now (Schmidt, Tania M)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Thu, 28 Jul 2005 22:06:01 -0500
From: Steve Schild Winona Online Democracy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: [Winona] Concerning my study
To: [email protected]
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Long-time Winona Daily News editor and editorialist Adolph Bremer (RIP)
once wisely cautioned against demanding the last word in a disagreement. I
think he was right, and that's why I'm reluctant to respond to Randy
Schenkat's recent letter to the editor and some of the things written on
Winona Online Democracy (WOD) since news about my study of it was
published. Still, I feel that a few points demand making.
First, a question: Has anyone read the study? If not, maybe people should
read it before they analyze or criticize it.
Second, Mr. Schenkat in his letter and Duane Peterson in a WOD posting are
wrong when they write that I have not made any suggestions as to how WOD
can improve. In a May 12, 2004, column in the Winona Daily News
summarizing survey research I did of WOD "lurkers," I included this URL:
http://av.smumn.edu/schild. Anyone who went to that site and read that
study would know that I devoted about a page to suggestions about how WOD
might address some of the shortcomings and concerns that had been brought
up by its subscribers-not by me. Those suggestions include:
o imposing stricter limits on the frequency with which subscribers could
post messages;
o managing the list more actively to promote more balance in ideological
or partisan opinion; and
o experimenting with an "equal time" feature in which the "other opinion"
could be more actively sought out or presented.
Regarding Ruth Charles' statement on WOD that "Maybe there is a problem
with the research methods in understanding the impact that WOD can have,"
let me say this: Both surveys I conducted of WOD subscribers were posted
on the list itself, so if the surveys had grave shortcomings, I'm
surprised they weren't pointed out right away. Besides the surveys, all my
research about WOD quotes extensively from comments made on WOD by WOD
subscribers. The other major element of my research has been
statistical-counting and categorizing-and nobody has told me my numbers
are wrong. As far as my having been both a researcher and a subscriber,
I'm not the only one for whom that's true-but I am the only one who's been
criticized for those dual roles.
Also related to Ms. Charles' remark is my final point: The standard I've
kept foremost in mind in studying WOD is the first sentence of its mission
statement: "The goal of Winona Online Democracy is to empower, inform, and
engage the citizenry by creating an ongoing community-wide discussion of
local public issues." I mention this to make clear that I'm not evaluating
WOD according to my terms, but to its own terms. And I think the numbers
make clear that a group dominated by as small a number of people as
dominate WOD has not achieved a community-wide discussion.
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Thu, 28 Jul 2005 23:34:54 -0500
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: [Winona] understanding now
To: "Kathy Seifert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "WOD"
<[email protected]>
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Thank you for your comments Kathy,
I have read WOD for almost two years but until a few days ago had never
posted.
I apologize to Allan Perry if my comments offended him but I would remind
him that I did respond to his comments of a few days ago in private and
with respect.
Personally, I enjoy the fact that we all have different styles of
expressing ourselves. I like your style too Al, it reminds me of my good
friend Eric who used to post here also.
Mike Kirschmann [EMAIL PROTECTED]
----- Original Message -----
From: Kathy Seifert
To: WOD
Sent: Thursday, July 28, 2005 2:28 PM
Subject: Re: [Winona] understanding now
[Winona Online Democracy]
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Al:
I would have to disagree with you on several of your statements below.
Personal attacks toward government employees or elected officials are not
considered acceptable on WOD. As a former list manager, I often tried to
make this point both on- and off-list. There is no prohibition for
criticizing or attacking their policies or decisions, though. I would hope
that most of us could do our best to make the distinction clear in our
messages, but unfortunately that does not always happen.
I would also disagree with your statement that the "forum has failed." On
what do you base your opinion? We've been actively discussing issues in
Winona for nearly 5 years and have approximately 200 subscribers. Is this
what you define as failure?
I'd like also to remind members that when an individual oversteps the
boundary of civility, they most likely will receive off-list communication
from the forum manager so that rather than some public form of criticism
of the individual offender, what list members see is a more general
reminder to all of the expectations. Generally that is followed by change
in the tone of the debate, an apology by the offender, or the topic fades
away. Just because an individual is not reprimanded on the the list, does
not mean that their actions are seen as acceptable.
Regardless, I'd like to thank Phil for his efforts in requesting that we
all try to remain civil on this forum and encourage other subscribers to
feel free to do the same. I'd like to see more of us expect civility from
all--no matter our statuses--community members and civil servants are
equally deserving of respect.
Kathy Seifert
----- Original Message -----
From: allan perry
To: WOD
Sent: Thursday, July 28, 2005 1:38 PM
Subject: [Winona] understanding now
[Winona Online Democracy]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm sorry that I did not understand the ground rules earlier.
Obvioulsy it is not permitted to make personal attacks and sarcastic
comments towards most individuals. But it certainly is allowed if those
are aimed at any government or employee therof, as shown by Turek and
Kirschman. I'll aim my complaints more carefully in the future.
No wonder this forum has failed.
Al
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Start your day with Yahoo! - make it your home page
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
This message was posted to Winona Online Democracy
All messages must be signed by the senders actual name.
No commercial solicitations are allowed on this list.
To manage your subscription or view the message archives, please visit
http://mapnp.mnforum.org/mailman/listinfo/winona
Any problems or suggestions can be directed to
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
If you want help on how to contact elected officials, go to the Contact
page at
http://www.winonaonlinedemocracy.org
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
This message was posted to Winona Online Democracy
All messages must be signed by the senders actual name.
No commercial solicitations are allowed on this list.
To manage your subscription or view the message archives, please visit
http://mapnp.mnforum.org/mailman/listinfo/winona
Any problems or suggestions can be directed to
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
If you want help on how to contact elected officials, go to the Contact
page at
http://www.winonaonlinedemocracy.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
http://mapnp.Geeks.ORG/pipermail/winona/attachments/20050728/6996cbd2/attachment-0001.html
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Fri, 29 Jul 2005 08:24:40 -0500
From: "Schmidt, Tania M" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: RE: Re: [Winona] understanding now
To: "Kathy Seifert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, <[email protected]>
Cc: "Stafford, John J" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Message-ID:
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
I am a commoner. I happen to agree with John Stafford. The forum is not
technically friendly, and as John can attest, I am quite in tune with
technical endeavors.
The forum does not ask for the commoner's opinion. It is not welcomed.
Political figures and key positions do not engage in discussion often
because, the forum does not represent the constituency base in Winona.
When the forum is questioned, the elitists pat themselves on the back
defending it, rather than seriously looking at how it is lacking in
participation and
impact. Adding more people and more "uncommon" opinions would move
participants out of their comfort zone. John may have posted more than
once, but it hardly requires a public warning of banishment. That's
friendly and welcoming....and democratic.
200 people out of 30,000 is 0.6% of the population. This is probably an
accurate figure when it comes to seeking out those actively engaged in
local politics in any community, but it will not be enough to "make a
difference" per se.
Now I realize I hold an unpopular view and therefore will likely be
banished in public as well. But I am a strong old Kraut...and I can
take it.
Tania M. Schmidt
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Kathy Seifert
Sent: Thursday, July 28, 2005 9:26 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Re: [Winona] understanding now
[Winona Online Democracy]
------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Winona mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.mnforum.org/mailman/listinfo/winona
End of Winona Digest, Vol 19, Issue 22
**************************************
_______________________________________________
This message was posted to Winona Online Democracy
All messages must be signed by the senders actual name.
No commercial solicitations are allowed on this list.
To manage your subscription or view the message archives, please visit
http://mapnp.mnforum.org/mailman/listinfo/winona
Any problems or suggestions can be directed to
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
If you want help on how to contact elected officials, go to the Contact page at
http://www.winonaonlinedemocracy.org
