We were pleased to see the harmony as the council filled all the vacant committee assignments at the July 7th meeting.
Certainly worth noting was the fact that newly appointed Council Member Steve Solomon volunteered for not one but two positions: liaison to the Historical Society Committees as well as the Development Review Board---which, hopefully will still exist as we move forward.
Council Member Barry Gillaspie was totally magnanimous in offering the Amphi School Board liaison to Mary Snider, who graciously accepted.
11 comments:
Initially Solomon asked not to be considered for any liaison position. Now he has volunteered for liaison to the DRB. Could that be because he knows/suspects the DRB will soon cease to exist?
A cynic may think that's the case.
Others may want to give him the benefit of the doubt.
Palomino may be "right on."
And I guess that I would put forth the question of whether it makes any difference?
I think Art's response is right on. Palomino may be a cynic.
OVOT,
Of course it makes a difference! If Solomon picked the DRB liaison position because he assumes he'll never have to fill that position, then it shows an unwillingness on his part to contribute his time. Remember he initially asked not to be considered for ANY liaison position. I see a pattern there.
Also, didn't you say that you wouldn't post anymore unless someone stated something that was not a fact?
"Initially Solomon asked not to be considered for any liaison position." FACT
"Now he has volunteered for liaison to the DRB." FACT
"Could that be because he knows/suspects the DRB will soon cease to exist." QUESTION/THEORY
So we're not allowed to ask questions now? We're not allowed to present theories? Lest the great and powerful OVOT set us straight! If theories also aren't allowed by OVOT, then I must point out OVOT's comment:
"Palomino may be a cynic." THEORY
Palomino...Here are your words.
"then it shows an unwillingness on his part to contribute his time."
Just exactly what does volunteering to fill a vacated position on the Town Council show if not a willingness to contribute time.
Here are Art's words:
"A cynic may think that's the case."
"Palomino may be "right on.""
I am simply agreeing with Art. Jump his bones...not mine.
Have a great day.
To no one's surprise, I'd rather cox not agree with me, especially when he adds two & two, and gets FIVE.
Premise:
1)A cynic may think that's the case.
2) Palomino may be right on.
Conclusion that Palomino is a cynic is faulty reasoning.
I agree with Palomino that Solomon may have volunteered to serve on a board that this council may soon disband.
Need anybody be reminded that our new mayor is on record as stating he wants the DRB axed?
When we did a posting initially pointing out that Solomon refused to serve as a liaison to any committee, perhaps he (Solomon) read the blog and had a change of heart.
Perhaps this council will read the blog and NOT AXE THE DRB.
As for Solomon agreeing to serve on the council, might it be because he wants to look out for the interest's of the developers and SAHBA---part of "the old boys network" of which he is a member?
If I disagree with art he gives me crap and tells me I denigrate him. I agree with Art and he says he doesn't want me to agree with him.
"Conclusion that Palomino is a cynic is faulty reasoning."
It's your reasoning Art, not mine.
There are writers in Hollywierd that couldn't dream this stuff up. This is more fun than a barrel of monkeys.
Art....No comment on the staff being an advocate for developers? I'd sure like to chat about that one.
OVOT,
You asked -- Just exactly what does volunteering to fill a vacated position on the Town Council show if not a willingness to contribute time.
As Art pointed out, he may have wanted to contribute his time as a council member to look out for developers interest and SAHBA. I agree because it looks to me that he is only willing to contribute his time to serve on the town council but not willing to contribute his time for much else. In other words, he'll serve if there's something in it for HIM.
Now I didn't think this originally. You might remember I said that I was neutral on Solomon in the beginning because I didn't know enough about him to have an opinion at that time. But now I'm seeing a pattern and I'm forming an opinion based on that pattern.
Now as for you, you said you agree with Art -- and Art said that I may be "right on" in my assumption about Solomon. So you agree with me on why Solomon may have signed up for the DRB liaison position?
Palomino...you can think anything you want to think and I am confident that you will in spite of any facts that may be presented to support another conclusion.
But to help you CLEARLY understand what I said I will repost it.
Don't forget the old saying about "assumptions". And that's all you have at this point.
Here are Art's words:
"A cynic may think that's the case."
"Palomino may be "right on.""
I am simply agreeing with Art.
You (that would b Palomino) may be a cynic....according to art.
OVOT,
I notice you do not want to specify whether or not you agree with me as to the reason that Solomon applied for the DRB liaison position. You just keep talking about Art's "cynic" comment.
So I'll say this -- I'd rather be a cynic than naive.
Palomino....I thought my comments would lead you to the my conclusion about Solomon's reasons for volunteering. Evidently it did not. No, I do not agree with you.
I do not attempt to second guess people's reasons for acting in a certain way. If I am truly interested enough to know, I usually make the effort to ask. Might I suggest you do the same. If you don't want to take the time or effort to make an appointment and sit with him and chat for a short while, at least write him an e-mail and ask why he volunteered.
I seldom walk away from a serious discussion with an individual without learning something. It may be small or relatively insigniificant but it is something that I didn't know before I took the time and effort to interact.
It's time well spent.
Post a Comment