MoveKelownaForward

[CRCP]

Member's posts follow:

[John Zeger]

MoveKelownaForward has moved forward itself by holding a meeting last night at the Ramada Lodge instead of their usual venue of the bar. I just hope that this basically anti-CRCP group can clean up their act and get beyond the personal attacks and smears and do something that actually promotes their agenda while at the same time elevating the level of their tactics to a higher ethical plane.

[dmgr]

I am sure that you have had some negative feedback, but you cannot claim that you have never been guilty of the same sort of behaviour.....all one has to do is take a look at some of your postings on Castanet.net..........but, I am sure you will deny this, or erase this posting, rather than honestly respond to it.

I am curious, do you know for sure they generally meet in bars, or is that speculation?? and if it is true, what is wrong with a bar?? (I am assuming it would likely be a neigbourhood pub)?

[Rick Shea]

What does all this have to do with the topic of this thread? I recommend a PM if you have questions like this. Thanks.

[Rick Shea]

I for one would welcome a good, honest debate on the issues, drawing on facts, studies, literature, and (hopefully reliable) sources of information in general. If that's the direction they're headed, then good on them.

The issues facing Kelowna (and this planet) are too important for any other response.

[dmgr]

It has to do with the content of the original posting, Mr. Shea.
If one chooses to publicly call for one group to "clean up their act and get beyond the personal attacks and smears", then should I not be able to ask the same of the person asking that question, using the same format?

Furthermore, there was an open statement that MKF met in bars as their usual meeting place, so it is in keeping with the thread to ask if that is an assumption or if it is a known fact.

[Rick Shea]

Do you actually have some information to offer here, or are you just interested in questioning Mr. Zeger's integrity? From what I've seen, it seems to be the latter, but please prove me wrong. Thanks.

Nowhere did Mr. Zeger say that there was anything wrong with meeting in a bar, only that the Ramada was an improvement -- a more formal atmosphere, and so on.

Personally, I see that as a step which would most likely improve the credibility of this group.

[dmgr]

Open debates are good, but there has to be room for compromise and an open mind.
I have many different opinions from those of the CRCP and MKF,as well. The reason for this, is that not ALL growth is good, not ALL high density is appropriate, but the political, economic, socio-economic, and environmental factors all need to be considered.
I am a philosophy, political science and economics major, so I try to approach the issues of growth from multiple points of view, I hope the CRCP will do the same, instead of assuming that greed is the cause for growth.................and if some people prosper, it may or may not be a bad thing..........but a balance has to be found (would any of us turn down a raise, or an opportunity to earn a comfortable living?)

[Rick Shea]

Again, those comments would more properly belong in other threads, so please continue this discussion in an appropriate thread, and thanks.

[John Zeger]

dmgr said:

I am curious, do you know for sure they generally meet in bars, or is that speculation?? and if it is true, what is wrong with a bar?? (I am assuming it would likely be a neigbourhood pub)?

I know for a fact that MoveKelownaForward has met at Doc Willoughby's and people are free to infer from that whatever they wish. Freedom or at least freedom of speech obviously isn't something that you value having written a letter to the editor complaining that the media was paying too much attention to some points of view that CRCP expressed and suggesting that our perspectives shouldn't get much media play.

As you say you are a student of philosophy, I wonder if you ever read John Stuart Mill? The following quote is taken from the Social Philosophy and Policy website:

"Freedom of expression found perhaps its most eloquent advocate in John Stuart Mill, whose On Liberty (1859) encapsulated the case for the unfettered dissemination of ideas like no other work before or since. In words that would echo through debates over personal and press freedoms until our day, Mill declared: "If all mankind, minus one, were of one opinion, and only one person were of the contrary opinion, mankind would be no more justified in silencing that one person, than he, if he had the power, would be justified in silencing mankind."

Although I disagree with MoveKelownaForward's point of view, I have never nor will I ever suggest that their perspective doesn't have the right to be expressed.

[dmgr]

Mr. Zeger, thank-you for answering my question......I was curious, that is all. I will say again, I have no desire to prevent freedom of speech in any way, but I do feel the media has a responsibility to make sure that all information about any politically motivated group is presented. I would be thrilled if the media did a full report on the CRCP, I would welcome your views to be expressed in the light of a full story about the organization. The fact is, this group voices itself as a form of authority and as a voice of the community. I would expect the media to do the same for any group, especially one as outspoken at this one. PETA, for example, is a group that has values I could subscribe to, however, the information that has been disclosed by the media about the group has made me choose to not to support them or use their arguments. Likewise, I used to be critical of the CAW, until I learned more about that particular union.
My point is this, any influential group in governing matters should be exposed to the public, the good and the bad(if there is any). Rather than assuming I am trying to shut you up, why don't you take it as an invitation to talk aobut the organization. You missed an opportunity to make the CRCP look good by the way you responded to my letter in the paper, you could have publicly said "this is what we are all about, this is the nature of our organization......check us out, we have lots to offer", instead you chose to call me a liar, refused to address the questions asked and, failed to provide convincing evidence that I was mistaken in I disagreeumptions; the reactions you expressed on Castanet were not gracious, not were they on here, and that can create a negative impression rather than the positive one you desire.

Please consider what I've said before reacting. I have reacted to things in the past without carefully choosing my words, and the result is always negative. However, choosing to repsond to things thoughtfully and diplomatically almost always results in something positive.
The CRCP does have some valid arguments, and they should be heard. There always needs to be a system of checks and balances in any community in order to ensure that corrupt activities do not become the norm.......the CRCP may very well be the balance that Kelowna needs, but failing to use every opportunity to present the organization in the best light might result in it no longer being taken seriously.
The same can be said for any other orgainization, as well.

[John Zeger]

dmgr said:

Mr. Zeger, thank-you for answering my question......I was curious, that is all. I will say again, I have no desire to prevent freedom of speech in any way, but I do feel the media has a responsibility to make sure that all information about any politically motivated group is presented. I would be thrilled if the media did a full report on the CRCP, I would welcome your views to be expressed in the light of a full story about the organization. The fact is, this group voices itself as a form of authority and as a voice of the community. I would expect the media to do the same for any group, especially one as outspoken at this one. PETA, for example, is a group that has values I could subscribe to, however, the information that has been disclosed by the media about the group has made me choose to not to support them or use their arguments. Likewise, I used to be critical of the CAW, until I learned more about that particular union.

If that is the way you genuinely feel, Dean, (may I call you Dean?) and aren't just trying to smear CRCP yourself, then why didn't you raise the same questions regarding MoveKelownaForward which got sufficient publicity, at least in the Daily Courier, about its recent Meet and Greet? You didn't see me writing letters to the editor suggesting that everything knowable about the group should be known before writing anything about them. But as this seems to be a sticking point with you, why weren't you consistent in your approach to media coverage of MoveKelownaForward with your approach to its coverage of CRCP?

[Rick Shea]

dmgr said:

...
The same can be said for any other orgainization, as well.

In that light, it will be very interesting to see if the MKF group can offer anything other than the typical urban growth machine propaganda. I certainly hope so, as the issues deserve more than that.

For example, it would be interesting to see a reasoned analysis of the report "Social Sustainability in Vancouver" that has been cited elsewhere on this forum.