Comments on: Woodlot Council meeting report http://lamespotting.com/2009/04/20/woodlot-council-meeting-report/ New content whenever I can think of something to write Mon, 14 May 2012 17:59:29 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2 By: Lamespotting http://lamespotting.com/2009/04/20/woodlot-council-meeting-report/comment-page-1/#comment-286 Lamespotting Mon, 20 Apr 2009 13:36:47 +0000 http://lamespotting.com/?p=512#comment-286 1) He didn't want it mentioned because the opposition were claiming that it was rigged to be in favour of the woodlot site. They were also accusing the mayor of censorship. 2) That's why I'm here :-) 3) It is also making sure that the environmental laws are being followed. It also also exposed areas where the process could be improved, such as releasing more information and plans on the Internet. 1) He didn’t want it mentioned because the opposition were claiming that it was rigged to be in favour of the woodlot site. They were also accusing the mayor of censorship.
2) That’s why I’m here :-)

3) It is also making sure that the environmental laws are being followed. It also also exposed areas where the process could be improved, such as releasing more information and plans on the Internet.

]]> By: Independent http://lamespotting.com/2009/04/20/woodlot-council-meeting-report/comment-page-1/#comment-285 Independent Mon, 20 Apr 2009 12:26:53 +0000 http://lamespotting.com/?p=512#comment-285 Three quick points: 1) Why would the Mayor not allow his Facebook site to be mentioned? He formed it to find out public opinion. 2) The term silent majority means nothing. The majority must speak out if they are indeed in favour. I can't say that the NDP would have won the last federal election because those who did not vote would've voted for the NDP. I also can't say that the people who stay silent on a given issue automatically support my side. It's an erroneous argument. 3) If anything, this issue brings city politics and the workings of city hall to the forefront. That alone is a good thing. Three quick points:

1) Why would the Mayor not allow his Facebook site to be mentioned? He formed it to find out public opinion.

2) The term silent majority means nothing. The majority must speak out if they are indeed in favour. I can’t say that the NDP would have won the last federal election because those who did not vote would’ve voted for the NDP. I also can’t say that the people who stay silent on a given issue automatically support my side. It’s an erroneous argument.

3) If anything, this issue brings city politics and the workings of city hall to the forefront. That alone is a good thing.

]]>