Reply With QuoteOriginally Posted by lord Geof
Did we forget that this was the same process last year?
For someone who complains about people posting anonymously to Speak Up, it is quite hilarious that you would complain about this process for Meet the Candidates. You always say that anonymous posts should end up in the waste can. It actually sounds like you made up the rules.
By the way, were you brave and put your name and address on a question ?
I don't actually answer this post, but welcome your justification for why it shouldn't be "what's good for the goose is good for the gander".
Tsk, tsk, Greg. The same format was used as last year where only questions with an individual’s name posted would be considered acceptable. You were at last year’s meeting and should have known that and where it was again explained this year that the process would be the same.
So if only ten residents attended and six of them were brave enough to sign their names to the questions (60%) who were the other four attendees who didn’t have the guts to sign their names? And do you know for sure whether there were four individuals who entered questions and what was their reason for not entering their names?
Regardless, I listened to a recording of the Candidates Forum and found the questions covered a lot of the so-called issues you harp on and blame the Superintendent and majority of BOE members for not addressing or not being transparent on – such as:
• Bullying
• Opioid addiction
• What makes Dr. Vallely a good Superintendent
• Use of test scores for teacher evaluation
• Whose best interests will be served, taxpayers or candidate’s personal believe
• How many BOE meetings have the candidate’s made in the last year
• What skill sets does the candidate bring to the BOE
IMHO, I thought all three candidates did well in answering the questions. From their answers given it appears there is a consensus that the District is acting appropriately and as transparent as can be regarding the bullying and drug use problem – Lancaster is not immune to the problem, nor unique as other districts are experiencing same issues.
As for Dr. Vallely all candidates praised him for his leadership role in directing the district to the successful academic recognition it now receives and where children have a better opportunity to succeed after graduating.
There is good news and there is bad news. The good news is that the district had a good night. The bad news is that the district had a good night and that must really piss off Mr. Sojka and his "the sky is falling" cohorts!
There certainly was a candidate consensus that LCSD does indeed put a good product!
Geof, I hope you are not an educational professional, because you can't tell the difference between an in-person, identified questioner, and a faceless anonymous poster, making unsupported comments and accusations. Dummy.
Confused again Lee, I actually like the rule of having to use your name. All 3 candidates forgot about the Lancaster teacher with tenure being removed. I believe you would call the vote for two candidates who only attended 2-3 school board meetings in the last year Jenny's come lately. Or late to the party.
Wow, I would have expected far better from an accomplished orator (typically about half right in front of the BOE), a polished communicator (who always answers all objections and questions regarding his posts -"NOT"), and a self-proclaimed humanitarian and volunteer.
But, I guess that was too much to expect. I guess your ghost writer is on vacation.
I am not a professional educator, as my main profession, but I have trained and taught more successful individuals in my professional career than you can count, even with your calculator. Can you make that same claim?
As to your question of whether I realize the difference between an in-person identified questioner, and anonymous poster, I can definitively answer yes.
An in-person and identified questioner has no reason to be concerned about identifying themselves. So, when giving their name and address in order to ask a question, they are presented with no peril.
Unless that individual intends to pose a question that will result in significant controversy, which is unlikely in the setting we are discussing, there is no intrusion on their personal life, or worry of retribution. If the individual intends to start havoc, they should expect a reasonable control.
When a poster expresses a view or opinion on a subject on Speak Up, the individual is faced with significant peril from certain fellow posters. Not only are individuals faced with an unbelievably threatening tone and discourse(from a select few), but also the true concern about personal peril, with discussion around harassment, and knowledge regarding actual events enacted by certain factions with a particular grudge.
These two scenarios are completely different, and any rationale individual can understand the reticence of a poster, versus the innocent interaction of a questioner at Meet the Candidate.
Tell me I am wrong oh wise and benevolent one.
Oh, and by the way I laugh again at your lack of clear communication. Your initial post regarding the Meet the Candidate clearly expressed your disdain for the requirement to include name and address on the question "as per Dr V". The undertone was blatantly obvious. And if that was not you intention, you need to learn how to clearly communicate your thoughts. Maybe your ghost writer can assist upon return from vacation, as cut and paste does not serve well. The communication certainly likened to the requirement to your objection to call ahead to present at the regular meetings.
Then, you tell Lee that you are in favor of the rule. Nice flip flop. The communication cannot appear more like a typical reversal.
For God's sake Greg...please save us from further ruin and embarrassment...please run for school board next year. With you on the hotseat it would be interesting to see your responses once you learn of just what folks do in this district. Some where along the line, you must have taken a rap on the noggin' from cutting down some trees.
Confused? Nah.
I clearly see the disingenuous tool you really are. You encourage everyone to be ‘brave’; to use their names and support you in your efforts to disparage our school district, its Superintendent and administrators. You portray the district as being unique with issues like bullying and substance abuse and where they lack transparency in naming names and giving progress reports where it has been made amply clear such information is privileged until such time the investigation has been completed. The two teachers in question have been dismissed, but that’s not good enough for you.
Now your latest pursuit is to disparage the district regarding national and state rankings; another attempt to claim LCSD does not put out a good product. You have made several other egregious claims without fact or foundation.
All this animosity against the district and superintendent and Mr. Sojka appears at the Meet the Candidates forum this past Monday night and Mr. Braveheart submits the following question:
If elected will you represent taxpayers or personal beliefs?
Imagine that, all those perceived issues Mr. Braveheart brings to light on Speakup and he chooses to ask a question that relates to none of them. Coward!
And to make matters worse, as one that questions whether the district does indeed put out a good product, he chooses not to comment on the budget; that is if he stayed for the budget presentation. I value the importance of giving the children an opportunity to getting a good education. I believe LCSD does put out a good product and will vote to approve the budget.
As to the two candidates only attending 2-3 BOE meetings that used to bother me when there were no recordings posted on either the LCSD or Town of Lancaster websites. We now have access to such information. In fact, how many town board meetings did town councilman Adam Dickman appear at? Someone you supported and who won the seat. Hypocrisy!
Last edited by Lee Chowaniec; May 10th, 2018 at 11:19 AM.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions