March 2017

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
      1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8 9 10 11
12 13 14 15 16 17 18
19 20 21 22 23 24 25
26 27 28 29 30 31  

« Landfill bombshell | Main | GCWS suit »

Sep 13, 2011

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Ron

Ok so they are going to vote to suspend Nancy from voting tonight pending a lawsuit filed by Gate City that would decide if she can vote? Legally shouldn't council wait for outcome of the lawsuit filed by Gate City? What a mess. The mini-majority is really setting themselves up for a lawsuit that could delay this whole thing and prevent the landfill from opening. Time is running short and the city council election is around the corner.

bubba

"Legally shouldn't council wait for outcome of the lawsuit filed by Gate City?"

City Council has the prerogative to force a recusal at its discretion. I don't think there are any limitations.

Gerry Alfano

The behavior of the mini-majority continues to amaze me. When did they ever care about legal? After all, we're paying the legal bills.

Kurt

City Council has the prerogative to force a recusal, Bubba? Where are you getting that from? And how does it make sense to that Councilmembers can vote on other Councilmembers' alleged conflicts? That is a recipe for future board disfunction. Oh wait, this Board could not get more disfunctional.

Meno

DH Griffin Sr and Jr. gave Bill Knight at least $1000 combined in his 2009 campaign for mayor. I'm only on his second report.

Meno

Marylene Griffin of Shimer Dr. (tax property records lists this as owned by David H. and Marylene Griffin) $500 donation to Mary Rakestraw in 2009.

Roch101

Now don't you go slamming Gate City, their lawsuit contradicts the "truths" they told us about in their nice full page color newspaper ad, but I'm sure there is a good reason.

David Hoggard

Just, plain, wow.

I'd gladly forgo whatever extra amount I might be required to pay to get rid of my trash - both now and in the future - for this whole thing to just go away.

This is just crazy.


Tony Wilkins

EC: "Word is there may be a vote at tonight's Council meeting to force Vaughan's recusal".

As Floyd Lawson once said, "RUMOR!".

Ed Cone

No, actually, fact, and well sourced before publishing, with comment from a councilmember forthcoming today.

What do you think of the plan, Tony?

Roch101

Ed gets points deducted for not describing his sources, Tony gets points deducted for blurring the line between an undocumented prediction of some governmental action and an undocumented personal smear.

Tony Wilkins

Just fyi, posted among the 247 comments at Guarino's rumor mill:
"A new low, Joe." Posted by: Tony Wilkins | September 07, 2011 at 12:32 AM

Point taken Roch, but some might say the "rumors" are similar. Couldn't the "undocumented personal smear" be related to the council members in which Ed circulated gossip about? That's not very blurry to me.

I like Ed's choice of "Word is there may be", which protects him well. But that could pertain to anything, couldn't it?

Roch101

Tony, I appreciate your willingness to stand up for fair play and decency, but "word is there may be a vote" and "word is a certain unnamed elected so-and-so is a degenerate" seem to have enough of a difference to me to warrant a distinction.

But yes, I don't like it when bloggers just put something out there without some indication of where it came from, often because it makes it hard to know how authoritative it may be and because, if its wrong, the source suffers no consequence to his or her credibility.

Roch101

And also, because reporting something without sourcing it for your audience makes it indistinguishable from exaggerations or fabrications. If we start to accept "Word is..." as "Probably true," then we are going to create a jungle of camouflage for complete bullshit.

Ed Cone

I'm careful about how I word things. My (accurate) information came from excellent sources, but it was still prospective at that point and I hadn't cleared the use of their names with them, so I posted it as backroom buzz.

And, yes, there's a big difference between a personal smear and a report of political maneuvering.

Also, you build a reputation over time for accuracy, including corrections of factual errors.

So, anyway, Tony, what is your opinion of the strategy that failed?

Tony Wilkins

Roch: "If we start to accept "Word is..." as "Probably true," then we are going to create a jungle of camouflage for complete bullshit".

Agreed.

EC: "there's a big difference between a personal smear and a report of political maneuvering".

Not so sure. But unsure enough not to argue the point. Political maneuvering could be construed as a personal smear and may have been in this case. I concede.

EC: "So, anyway, Tony, what is your opinion of the strategy that failed?".

My knowledge is limited as to what that strategy was so I'll just say that hardball politics ain't always purdy.

Ed Cone

Readers can and should judge by context and track record.

I'd prefer to run every item with a named source, but that's not always going to happen. I'd hope that readers see an item like this and say, hmm, he's been pretty accurate over the past 9.5 years of blogging and 15 years as a columnist, and also careful in his wording...and then see the subsequent confirmation of the report and add that to their reputation assessment.

I see big differences between unsupported and quite nasty insinuations of personal misconduct and discussing a potential political maneuver. In fact, I don't even see them in the same category of post or conduct.

bubba

"City Council has the prerogative to force a recusal, Bubba? Where are you getting that from?"

Ask City Council to explain it to you.

Tony Wilkins

It's okay, Ed. We all sometimes jump the gun.

Ed Cone

If beating a front page newspaper article by two days with an accurate story is jumping the gun, sure.

Roch101

As a tip sheet an important part of the local media ecosphere. But it's not set up as a definitive reporting vehicle.

Ed Cone

Definitely a tip sheet post -- an accurate one, to be sure, that IMHO adds to a long track record of careful practice and solid sources here.

But it's hard to characterize a blog by one post, or even one type of post. Hard news followed here quickly -- three hours later came the Brook letter, and then Matheny's comment on refusing to participate in the scheme, beyond which the N&R made little progress in this morning's front-pager.

And then a link to an old Coffee Mate commercial, because sources agree that dude and his turtleneck are awesome.

The comments to this entry are closed.