#1 2010-09-15 21:18:48

be cause she did not like the people who signed the censure artical and he printed there names ,however he will not give out the names of the 123 people.

Offline

 

#2 2010-09-15 22:16:53

By: fogcutter on 9/13/10
=====================
Robert wrote:

It's not a question of transparency, fogcutter. It's a question of ethics.
=====================

On that note, I double-checked with Wareham Week and they did not receive a list of folks who signed the petition. Yet, there you have it Rob.

I am told that the list of signees is not public information, yet Robert you have said list, which leads me to reasonably wonder if someone leaked it to you. Not only that, but you published it, thus putting it in the public domain.

I wish to comment more but before I do is this accurate so far?

By: robertslager on 9/13/10
I cannot speak to what Wareham Week does or does not have in its possession. The story said they were provided the list of targets by one of the petitioners.

You are correct in that nothing in the article, including the names of the petitioners, has been officially released as public information. I had no intention of printing anyone's name involved in this story until Wareham Week brought the names of the targets into the public domain. I made an editorial decision that since Wareham Week had already gone public then all aspects of the story should go public. If the accused were named than the names of the accusers should be revealed as well. You don't have to agree with that decision, but I am comfortable with it. It seemed equitable.

As I have stated many times, I will not discuss how I received any information from any source.

edited to add...
There's quite a bit more in this tête-à-tête between Fogcutter and Bobo.. I have decided to post a few "interesting" comments..and since Fogcutter has previously showed his "displeasure" at not being quoted "in full" I do apologize, FC.. But, I will not post the entire exchange..I'ld like to post everything I read from the Ragchat's..but then Bobo would throw a hissy fit.. If you'd like me to post the full exchange, please forward me the "relevant" commentary..and since I think you are far better than I at "cutting out" sections of relevance..I'll trust you to give an accurate "copy"..you know how to reach me..and I'll send a copy of this message to you as well...

TBW
P-SPAN

Last edited by P-SPAN (2010-09-16 18:28:07)

Offline

 

#3 2010-09-17 10:50:06

Mrs. "Make Wareham Fail" (MWF), Ellen Begley wrote..

By: 4dognite on 9/16/10
..Should anyone attempt to intimidate, mislead or adversely influence the senior population of Wareham, well, it certainly would be front page news and not be well received by ANYONE in the community.

What do you mean, Ellen?? Like adding a partisan political Rag to Meals on Wheels deliveries without permission...like having multiple stacks of that same Rag outside (and inside) the COA office? Like "scary" misleading flyers being sent out to seniors prior to Town Meeting?? https://docs.google.com/fileview?id=0Bz … l=en&pli=1

..or adding this in the 10/09 (just before last Fall's Town Meeting) to the "Senior Beacon"??

SENIOR HOUSING AT TOWN MEETING!
Of special interest to those over 55 is Article 2 on the annual
fall Town meeting warrant to be aired on October 26 in
the high school auditorium. Without support on the article,
selectmen cannot proceed with their plans to build over-55
affordable senior rental housing at Westfield on Charlotte
Furnace Road in West Wareham. The vote is critical and
“yes” vote would help many seniors living here. Presently there
are over 200 residents whose names are on the waiting list for
senior housing managed by the Wareham Housing Authority at
Redwood and Agawam. Just think, no leaves to rake, no snow
to shovel. That’s worth getting out for an evening!

https://docs.google.com/fileview?id=0Bz … YzQ5&hl=en



Let's see..there's no guarantee that the 200 people on the "list" would be the ones to get housing at "Westfield"...and don't you worry about reading too much into it..just think..you won't have to rake leaves...or shovel snow!!! So go on out and vote!! (The way we tell ya to).. Geez, and they call "us" scary..

"We" wouldn't attempt to "intimidate, mislead or adversely influence" our fellow citizens...seems you already have that covered..

TBW
P-SPAN

Last edited by P-SPAN (2010-09-17 14:52:12)

Offline

 

#4 2010-09-17 14:00:59

Goodness gracious, who wrote the first one? The misspellings and sentence structure and content are fourth grade level.

Offline

 

Board footer

warehamwater.cruelery.com