|
Post by John Zeger on Jul 9, 2007 9:52:29 GMT -5
In a recent mean-spirited post full of insults and offensive language which is typical of him and other members of the ratpack on the Castanet forum, Al Czervic states that growth controls would "annihilate any hopes for affordable housing." Like Not Factually Correct a.k.a. Not Politically Correct, Czervic should check his facts before making such statements as growth-controlled cities in the the U.S. such as Boulder, Colorado and Davis and Tracy, California have created many more units of affordable housing in recent years than has Kelowna in spite of the absence of such controls here. The only type of housing that uncontrolled growth Kelowna has turned out in large numbers recently is luxury housing because if left to their own devices developers will build only what maximizes their profits and not what benefits the community. But Czervic, having been a developer himself, probably doesn't need to be told that.
|
|
|
Post by John Zeger on Jul 15, 2007 9:34:53 GMT -5
Posted on the Castanet forum:
CanuckinOZ Board Meister
Joined: 29 Nov 2004 Posts: 575 Location: Brisbane, QLD Australia Posted: Yesterday at 9:25 pm Is John still trying to preach inacuracies and half truths?
last time he was posting on this forum he was trying to say that Kelowna should try to structure the city after Noosa in Australia with a clean unobstructed skyline, that was until I pointed out that there are more highrises in Noosa than are currently being planned in total in Kelowna, this guy is an ass -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
My response:
What's Noosa? CanuckinOz claims I was using Nossa as a model for Kelowna. I've never heard of Noosa so how could I have been saying anything about it?
This is yet another example of the ratpack on the Castanet forum spreading lies and inaccuracies about myself and, in this case, a complete fabrication. Are you getting the picture, folks?
BTW, notice the language that they use ("ass")? And this is permitted by the moderator of that forum. Some moderator!
|
|
|
Post by propeopl on Jul 17, 2007 9:56:42 GMT -5
I see that some of those ignorant idiots at Castanet think you were banned from the forum, John. They just don't get it, and obviously they never will.
As someone who was banned myself, I see how the moderator supports the rat pack mentality, and really doesn't want anyone with strong opinions who disagrees.
Conformity, "system justification" bias, and just about any other social and cognitive bias are clearly alive and well at Castanet, sadly.
|
|
|
Post by funkydog on Aug 13, 2007 0:21:20 GMT -5
I've been a participant on the Castanet forums for a while now, and have maintained by autonomy from the rat pack by simply not subjugating to the peer pressure. There is huge pressure to fit in to the rat pack there, if you post a contrary view, rather than discussing the matter, they'd rather attempt to put you on the defensive by attacking semantics in your posts - be it tone, communication style, misspellings, or just outright insults. Here's the latest scandal going on right now, continuing the "Letters To The Editor" fiasco, and the attempt by Jo, the administrator of the forums, to try to silence me through bully tactics. Castanet publishes false stories on their front page, claiming they are "Letters To The Editor". Basically, a post of mine from the topic Mardi Gras was taken and posted ad verbatim on the Castanet front page and represented as a Letter to the Editor. You might want to view this discussion before it is inevitably deleted.
|
|
|
Post by funkydog on Aug 13, 2007 13:34:58 GMT -5
This is now in the Forum Registration agreement on the Castanet forums. Instead of just making a simple change to how they use the forum content by users there, they would rather look like asses and make new forum members sign up allowing Castanet free license over their posts. This is all with Jo claiming she has nothing to do with Castenet policy, but can be seen in fact making policy and speaking for Castanet. You also agree by uploading materials to any forum or submitting any materials to us, you automatically grant (or warrant that the owner of such materials expressly granted) us a perpetual, royalty-free, irrevocable, nonexclusive right and license to use, reproduce, modify, adapt, publish, translate, publicly perform and display, create derivative works from and distribute such materials or incorporate such materials into any form, medium, or technology now known or later developed throughout the universe. In addition, you warrant that all so-called "moral rights" in those materials have been waived. I am glad they decided to include this, because it's only fair, and also causes me to stop contributing to their forum, since I know they can at any time use what I post any way they see fit, including misrepresenting my comments and displaying them as "Letters To The Editor" on the main site.
|
|
|
Post by propeopl on Aug 13, 2007 20:48:45 GMT -5
I guess that, if we wish to have an intelligent discussion that follows the normal rules of sociable conversation, we'll just have to look elsewhere. Clearly, Castanet is not going to be that place, at least not right now.
|
|
|
Post by robertmorin on Aug 16, 2007 3:59:42 GMT -5
I think that many other participants of that forum would like to engage in a meaningful discussion there as well, but the presence of these yahoos and the low standards set by the moderator have compromised the reputation of the Castanet forum as a place for serious dialogue. I have noticed there seem to be website forums that attract these kinds af yahoos. One of the worst was RantinandRaven.com. The fools who posted to this site were not interested in any kind of dialog and the moderator did not appear to have any standards at all. Incidentally, this site has since been closed. I just checked the Castanet forum and (sigh) things do not seem to have improved.
|
|
|
Post by John Zeger on Oct 14, 2007 20:41:34 GMT -5
No, things have not improved. This is a recent admission by one of their forum members of his attempt to disrupt a forum discussion. I have to wonder about their administrator that she can't keep control.
sleepdeprived Forum Übergod
Joined: 01 Dec 2005 Posts: 1219 Location: OK Mission Posted: Today at 10:02 am Post subject:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Sorry Jo, I'll refrain from my clearly defined attempts to disrupt the board. _________________
Sleepdeprived is a charter member of the ratpack.
|
|
|
Post by John Zeger on Oct 15, 2007 11:45:02 GMT -5
I have repeatedly been criticized by a Castanet forum member who calls himself "Fluffy". Here is one of his recent posts.
fluffy Forum Grand Pooh-bah
Joined: 01 Jun 2006 Posts: 2516 Location: Penticton, BC Posted: Sat Oct 13, 2007 4:41 pm Post subject:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Actually I'd have to say that with me the jury is still out. I don't particularly like the direction things have been heading because the ultimate result of uncontrolled growth is inevitable. I make no secret of my feelings that the Kelowna worth saving is forty years in the past, back before we became the hot destination for every old fart this side of Halifax. On the other hand, I have yet to hear any viable proposals for alternatives. The population controls/sustainability crowd seems to spend most of their time criticizing the current situation rather than offering practical, realistic solutions. I'd like to see the affordable housing situation addressed, I'd like to see more help for those on the dark edges of society, the homeless and addicted, and local infrastructure and carrying capacity is being sorely neglected. I don't believe the developers are to blame, they are business supplying a product in demand. The responsibility must lie with those creating the demand. I think city council could use a little more vision, but we have yet to see anyone who could supply that vision muster the voter appeal needed to get a seat. Truth be told, I think it that by the time many of these issues are dealt with seriously it may well be too late, if it isn't already.
Although Fluffy is long on criticism for others like myself, he is short on solutions and shows some pretty confused if not altogether contradictory thinking. In this post Fluffy says that we are running out of time to deal with serious issues but elsewhere he says that we have to go slow. He doesn't like uncontrolled growth but doesn't like growth controls either and has accused some like myself for failing to provide the means. In that regard I would advise Fluffy to start listening as I have always offered practical solutions. Finally, he has been sharply critical of my leadership but hasn't offered any of his own. He is the classic arm-chair critic, content to sit at his computer terminal and take swipes at other people, but is unwilling to stick his neck out or even be known for that fact. I would dismiss him as a big bag of hot air and cowardly to boot.
|
|
|
Post by John Zeger on Oct 19, 2007 10:33:35 GMT -5
There was a successful thread on the Castanet forum with the heading "The density of the downtown redevelopment area". The thread had been going for over a week with lots of discussion. However, since Fluffy started posting with his incessant personal attacks the thread has just died with the last post made five days ago being his. When Fluffy gets involved in a discussion on the Castanet forum it's akin to someone farting in a small room -- everyone else heads for the exit.
|
|
|
Post by John Zeger on Oct 22, 2007 23:32:36 GMT -5
grammatically_correct Fledgling Joined: 14 Aug 2007 Posts: 184 Posted: Sat Oct 20, 2007 8:53 am Post subject: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Jo wrote: These two posts are what I want to see from now on. Any of the other kind of posts, ie any post containing a personal attack, will be deleted without comment. Given that comment, I have to wonder why the following post, repeated from above, wasn't previously deleted. Is this not a discussion forum, with consistent rules? And with that, grammatically_correct points to the BIG problem with the Castanet forum -- a lack of consistency in applying "the rules."
|
|
|
Post by Rick Shea on Oct 23, 2007 10:26:37 GMT -5
And with that, grammatically_correct points to the BIG problem with the Castanet forum -- a lack of consistency in applying "the rules." The only consistent thing seems to be the anti-Zeger campaign. Perhaps you should be flattered by all the attention. I usually find that, when there's that much vitriol and obsession with personal characteristics, people are worried about the message from the person they are criticizing. Canadian politics at a high point! So keep up the great work! You're obviously making people upset and concerned, and that's often the first step in change. At times, the "catch more flies with honey" approach just catches flies, and we all know how much disease they spread.
|
|
|
Post by propeopl on Oct 23, 2007 21:38:05 GMT -5
Interesting that some people at that forum seem to think that sheer quantity of posts and members is somehow an indication of a good forum. Bigger is better. Perhaps they are overcompensating for some other deficiency in their lives, or anatomy.
If you took the average quality of the posts here and multiplied by the number of members, it would be a much large number than the same calculation for that forum. Obviously, those people don't have a clue about the nature of this forum (and a lot of other things too).
But, if you want fluff, stupidity, and personal attacks supported by the moderators, lack of content, lack of any real message, and moderators like those ones at that forum, knock yourself out. The National Enquirer of discussion forums is alive and well in Kelowna (with apologies to the Enquirer).
Sign me "Happily and proudly banned from that idiot's forum."
|
|
|
Post by John Zeger on Oct 24, 2007 9:52:12 GMT -5
Jo, the administrator of the Castanet forum, bans people like us for criticizing her failure to discipline the offending members there or for her lack of consistency in doing such. Instead of being intimidated by this, as she is hoping, more people should be speaking out about this practice, because as it currently stands the Castanet forum appears to be a place where the inmates are running the asylum.
|
|
|
Post by Rick Shea on Oct 24, 2007 10:13:16 GMT -5
I think I've been more than willing to give Jo the benefit of the doubt, as we've had some good discussions via PM. But I'm finally convinced that she either has a blind spot here, or that she is deliberately letting the anti-Zeger campaign continue for some reason. I think I'll continue to stay away, and even some of my friends have recently decided to do the same. Castanet's loss in their case, but I'm happy to hear that many members of that forum still read this one. Perhaps there's hope for them yet. So, on with the great discussion and information at this forum, and thanks, John. Thanks as well for setting up the Control Urban Growth website: controlgrowth.ning.com/
|
|