INC NEWS - dirt streets to be paved
ASalt
ASalt at nc.rr.com
Sun Mar 25 10:47:45 EDT 2007
I agree. Enough is enough.
Adaire Salt
----- Original Message -----
From: <kjj1 at duke.edu>
To: <inc-list at durhaminc.org>
Sent: Sunday, March 25, 2007 10:41 AM
Subject: Re: INC NEWS - dirt streets to be paved
> Hey Randy and Bill--
>
> Take it off line and settle this between yourselves.
>
> Kelly
>
> --On Sunday, March 25, 2007 10:27 AM -0400 RW Pickle <randy at 27beverly.com>
> wrote:
>
>> I understand English is a complex language to learn (from those from
>> other
>> lands now living here and learning English). I'd like to thank Bill for
>> his translation of my complex English into "Anderson Basic Script" (or
>> "Anderson BS" as we like to call it). It was no doubt for those of you
>> for
>> which English is a second language. Fortunately, I believe everyone on
>> the
>> list speaks and understands English well for I have had no requests for
>> translation into another language since I have maintained this list. So
>> the need to "dumb it down"" was probably unnecessary. Adding his emotions
>> to what he thought I said becomes what he says, not what I said. Perhaps
>> my English needs to be simpler for Bill and others (thinking the odds are
>> good that he's not alone even though he suggests he might be; I tend to
>> agree with him on his assessment that he is alone on this, but we both
>> could be wrong). As typical, something always gets lost in the
>> translation...
>>
>> I was asked to forward the information I provided about the paving of
>> gravel streets by our President and did so. It was a piece of info I had
>> yet seen made known to this neighborhood group list. Any email
>> conversations one may have with City staff is a matter of public record.
>> If you want the entire content of any post I ever send to this list that
>> would provide information other than that which was specifically
>> requested, you are able to get it under the Sunset Laws from the City. I
>> saw no reason (here I am deciding things again and deciding what you
>> might
>> read should you choose to do so) to forward content that was not
>> requested
>> and contained irrelevant information (other than what was requested).
>> There was not, nor will there ever be, censorship on my part. I was just
>> providing the specific information as requested. It wasn't a report or
>> anything other than some good info (if you live in a neighborhood where
>> one of these streets are located).
>>
>> Bill is miffed about the heavy handed moderator of this list (me).
>> Typically I would have expected him to bring his complaints to the source
>> instead of airing his disgust (?) via this list. I recently rejected a
>> number of posts (not just from Bill) and I sent those who were cross
>> posting, (dragging others from other lists across lists which they didn't
>> belong) an email notifying them of the actions taken and why. Not
>> everyone seems to understand how lists work and why there are rules for
>> posting. Some tend to want to use this list to glorify personal positions
>> they might take relating to an issue in their own neighborhood or some
>> other position that is not relevant to something INC is working on.
>> That's
>> fine when they contain it to their respective "neighborhood" lists. But
>> when posts are broadcast across the City, across lists that have a
>> variety
>> of people not on all those lists, it creates havoc for all of us who
>> maintain the mailing lists (which that person for INC is me; I am the
>> list
>> administrator). We start getting posts from people who aren't members of
>> a
>> particular list and have to decide what to do with those posts. They
>> create log jams in the system service that otherwise generally operates
>> maintenance free. It puts an unnecessary burden on those of us who
>> administer lists. It causes us to actually have to work at making the
>> list
>> work. I have taken the position to reject all of these problem posts
>> because generally the posts aren't coming from members of the INC list.
>> But when it's a member of the INC list causing the problems (as it was
>> this last time), I typically take the time to make those involved aware
>> the consequences of dragging folks who don't belong to a particular list,
>> across other lists. I try to educate everyone as to how it all works and
>> why something may just be wrong. Educating folks takes additional time,
>> but it tends to help the whole list by alleviating the problems at the
>> source. And as bad as it is, it seems to be the same people who do it
>> over
>> and over, never learning or remembering why it is not a good idea to
>> create these problems in the first place. Just clicking "reply all" seems
>> to be the biggest culprit. By not looking at where the reply is going (to
>> what lists or persons), it creates the problem really quick. Compound
>> that
>> by sheer numbers of emails and you can see how big this problem quickly
>> becomes.
>>
>> This mailing list is not my personal domain as Bill would like to infer.
>> It is the email list of INC (I think you all are aware of this). I am
>> just
>> the list administrator. And when I make a decision to do something
>> administrative, that is what I am charged to do. It is done so not out of
>> ignorance of the service, but from years of experience with it. Issues
>> are
>> handled the same, regardless of who the person creating the problem
>> might
>> be. Otherwise we'd all be bombarded with spam on the list and that's just
>> counter productive. So I had to again quietly spank Bill and other
>> members
>> of this INC list recently for cross posting and dragging others across
>> lists. It wasn't the first time and it probably won't be the last
>> (guessing, since it continues to happen even after trying education,
>> it'll
>> continue). Hey, it's just my job. Perhaps the remainder of those on this
>> list appreciate not getting a lot of spam. The system and policies work.
>> It doesn't happen.
>>
>> If this list is quiet, all must be well in the city we call Durham.
>> Everyone has the same ability to post as any other member. Maybe there is
>> just not much to talk about right now. Rest assured, it has nothing to do
>> with me as the administrator. If the lack of delegates at the last meeing
>> is any example, perhaps times are exceptionally good in Durham right now
>> and the need for INC involvement is much less. I don't recall another
>> meeting in the past (going back years and in some very poor weather)
>> where
>> there weren't enough members present to vote on something. The resolution
>> that was on the table to be voted on is now moot as it has already been
>> dealt with by our government officials. They wanted to know what INC
>> thought, but we were unable to provide that clue. That's a pretty poor
>> example to be setting. And this was in a month (Feb.) which typically has
>> a great deal of involvement since it's winter and there is less to do
>> outside (or vacations, or school kids out, etc). Every neighborhood has
>> the option of sending 2 delegates. Getting just one delegate last month
>> would have been a bonus. At least we could have moved forward instead of
>> being stuck and doing nothing. Often, time is of the essence as it was
>> last month on a resolution. By not voicing our opinion as a body, we lost
>> our opportunity for input into the process. And that is what INC is
>> really
>> all about.
>>
>> As a Board, we talk about a lot of things that never reach this list. I
>> am
>> sorry that conversations are carried on like this. I do believe they
>> would
>> stimulate conversation with our reading public if they were posted here.
>> But for whatever reason, they are dealt with off this list. Nothing
>> secret, just conversations that perhaps you may wish to have a voice in.
>> Or maybe the sheer volume would be seen as burdensome and you wouldn't
>> like it at all. One topic is what the role of this Board actually is;
>> what
>> duties you would like to see us perform and services you would like to
>> see
>> added. I'll be posting one of these conversations later this weekend
>> because I think there are some issues that you just need to be made aware
>> of before deciding directions for this body to take. As I have stressed
>> to
>> this Board, we don't make decisions, you the membership do. But perhaps
>> you'd like us to do more decision making and less of letting you decide.
>> Or maybe not.
>>
>> Someone will probably point out that I suggested in a previous post that
>> being concise and short were good things. That was relative to the words
>> of others I guess. I don't mind expounding on things when they are my
>> words. I guess I'm known for that...
>>
>> RWP
>> 27 Beverly
>>
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Randy
>>>
>>> Since you know everyone appreciates your effort in making their emails
>>> shorter and more concise, I'll perform the same service and translate
>>> what you've
>>> just said below.
>>>
>>> Basically you said, "No Bill, I'm not going to simply forward the
>>> original emails from city staff and others.
>>> Everyone besides you appreciates me censoring their information. That
>>> way
>>> they don't get muddled in details the way you have. And if you don't
>>> like
>>> it,
>>> don't say so in this public forum, contact me off line."
>>>
>>> And from now on, anyone wanting the short version of what Randy has to
>>> say,
>>> just come to me and I'll fill you in.
>>>
>>> Maybe you're right, Randy, perhaps I'm the only one who DOES NOT
>>> APPRECIATE
>>> YOU DECIDING WHAT INFORMATION I RECIEVE . And if brevity is the main
>>> objective, and the public really does want someone to cull their
>>> information, I
>>> doubt either one of us is ideal for that job.
>>>
>>> I haven't forgotten what a public forum this list used to be, but it
>>> sure
>>> has been quiet lately. It only takes a heavy handed listserv moderator
>>> to
>>> turn a
>>> public forum into one man's private domain.
>>>
>>> WWA
>>> 113 Markham
>>>
>>> In a message dated 3/24/2007 10:00:21 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
>>> randy at 27beverly.com writes:
>>>
>>> The entire email was not pertinent to the subjected post. That is why
>>> it
>>> was parsed. Perhaps you would have liked all of the pages, but I doubt
>>> that anyone would have enjoyed having their mailboxes packed with more
>>> irrelevant information. A recent example was an email from another
>>> Director from another City department. She told us in advance of an
>>> email that it was 14 meg of material and if we wanted it, she'd send it
>>> by snail
>>> mail. I appreciated the fact that she was concerned, as well as she
>>> should
>>> have been, that emails of that size would clog most email programs. In
>>> fact, the list server has a cap on the size of any post because of this
>>> issue. So when you see something broken down into only the relevant
>>> parts,
>>> understand that it was done so for a reason. Not that it was filtered
>>> or
>>> "all" of the irrelevant information was not included. I think this is
>>> generally understood and appreciated by most. Certainly the more
>>> concise
>>> an email is, the easier it is read and followed.
>>>
>>> So just to respond to your concerns, "her" is Julie Brenmen, the head
>>> of
>>> Budget and Finance and the person who heads up CCIP. If you even know
>>> what
>>> CCIP is and does, then "her" was known as well. Neither of these pieces
>>> of
>>> information were really relevant. The post related to dirt street
>>> improvements. The message in the post was more important to those who
>>> wanted this information than the details you wonder about. In fact, if
>>> you
>>> follow the work done by our City Council, this is old news as they have
>>> already dealt with this issue. But it wasn't widely distributed. Most
>>> neighborhoods with this issue are well aware of what the plans are for
>>> paving and improving our miles of gravel roads in this City. Some may
>>> not be, and for those that it is not an issue, it was all irrelevant
>>> anyway.
>>>
>>> It's about getting information out there, not the picky irrelevant
>>> details
>>> you regularly get muddled in. Complaints are better dealt with off this
>>> list. It just wastes others time and mailbox space.
>>>
>>> RWP
>>> 27 Beverly
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Not sure why you don't just forward the original message.
>>>> It would prevent questions such as "Who is her?"
>>>>
>>>> No need to copy and paste, INC member neighborhoods can take it raw,
>>>> please
>>>> forward the original.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks
>>>> Bill
>>>>
>>>> In a message dated 3/23/2007 9:44:49 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
>>>> randy at 27beverly.com writes:
>>>>
>>>> The following email was sent to the CCIP members (of which I am one
>>>> representing INC). It regards the dirt streets in Durham that will be
>>>> improved with the 2005 bond money. The following is a copy and paste
>>>> from
>>>> her email to us:
>>>>
>>>> "The following street segments will be paved with those funds (plus
>>>> some
>>>> funding for water & sewer improvements and sidewalks).
>>>>
>>>> Beebe Road
>>>>
>>>> Belgreen Road
>>>>
>>>> Boone Street
>>>>
>>>> Caltalpa Drive
>>>>
>>>> Castlerock Drive
>>>>
>>>> Chalk Level Road
>>>>
>>>> Chicago Street
>>>>
>>>> Dial Drive
>>>>
>>>> Edgerton Drive
>>>>
>>>> Obie Drive
>>>>
>>>> Roane Street
>>>>
>>>> Wynne Road"
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> RWP
>>>> 27 Beverly
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> INC-list mailing list
>>>> INC-list at rtpnet.org
>>>> http://lists.deltaforce.net/mailman/listinfo/inc-list
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ************************************** AOL now offers free email to
>>>> everyone.
>>>> Find out more about what's free from AOL at http://www.aol.com.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ====================================================================
>>> This e-mail, and any attachments to it, contains PRIVILEGED AND
>>> CONFIDENTIAL information intended only for the use of the addressee(s)
>>> or entity named on the e-mail. If you are not the intended recipient of
>>> this e-mail, or the employee or agent responsible for delivering it to
>>> the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any reading,
>>> dissemination or copying of this e-mail in error is strictly
>>> prohibited.
>>> If you have received this electronic transmission in error, please
>>> notify
>>> me by telephone (919-489-0576) or by electronic mail to the sender of
>>> this email, RW Pickle (pickle at patriot.net) immediately.
>>> =====================================================================
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> INC-list mailing list
>>> INC-list at rtpnet.org
>>> http://lists.deltaforce.net/mailman/listinfo/inc-list
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ************************************** AOL now offers free email to
>>> everyone.
>>> Find out more about what's free from AOL at http://www.aol.com.
>>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> INC-list mailing list
>> INC-list at rtpnet.org
>> http://lists.deltaforce.net/mailman/listinfo/inc-list
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> INC-list mailing list
> INC-list at rtpnet.org
> http://lists.deltaforce.net/mailman/listinfo/inc-list
>
More information about the INC-list
mailing list