Westside Mayoral - General Discussion

[T. Rawlin]

That would be opposed to the great insight Doug Findlater has submitted to his thread.

I don't see why Doug should waste his time on here. By this point, I imagine that most candidates have figured out that it is not worth their time to post on here. Why should anyone with something useful to do with their time bother responding to the anonymous complaints, innuendo, and allegations put forward by people such as hereiamagain, parachute, canadman, Bestside, and company? You cannot change the minds of those type of people, they are almost as bad as that idiot angusog. It is futile to even try.

These forums have a lot less impact and fewer readers than you might think. All of the threads over the past few months have been dominated by a few frequent posters who are narrow-minded, repetitive, and generally ignorant. The shameful behaviour on the naming thread from almost everyone involved has dragged down the entire forum lately.

I read these forums routinely during the 2005 and 2007 elections, and even then, I had to hold my nose for a lot of it. This year, I found too much of the content disgusting, and I only look at a few threads, somewhat infrequently.

[parachute]

Hello Ranger66 – regarding my non-appropriate, senseless and useless blurb originally posted here a short while ago:

It would have been “Better to stay silent and be thought ineffectual than to speak out and remove all doubt” - which is what I did!

[T. Rawlin]

Warm and fuzzy didn't cut it with me, anyway.
The candidate, perhaps not having T Rawlin's expertise in brevity (in whatever shape or form Mr.Rawlin practiced same) was quite successful in his efforts towards unification of the various factions, which, I assume, was his endeavour

Really? He successfully unified the various factions in this community by issuing a lengthy and inane press release? That is quite an accomplishment. I'll have to reconsider how I intend to vote tomorrow, knowing that.

[hereiamagain]

thank god I am only ALMOST as bad as angusog. I couldnt take it if I was JUST AS bad as angusog.

[inquisitive]

I do believe I was deliberately misquoted................? Please, take at least a second look at what I wrote and you then highlighted Mr. When I stated, "..... in his efforts towards unification........" you distorted this to Mr. Haslock's claim that he had achieved unification. Please,let's be fair.

[canadman]

But look at it this way hereiamagain, apparently we're not as good as steren, Urbane, gardengirl, Trainspotter, Fancy, etc... That couldn't have anything to do with their position on the candidates and the issues could it?

Then again, unlike us they are so flexible and open minded... so maybe that's what he meant.

[canadman]

Notwithstanding one post on a forum I have found Peter Haslock to be quite frank and direct with respect to the issues. I think his grassroots type pragmatism is what we need here in West Kelowna, sorry, I mean on the Westside.

I will take that over political cunning and an ends-justifies-the-means approach to municipal politics any day.

[occasional thoughts]

To ranger66 and others, in my role as Westside Weekly city hall reporter until a couple of weeks ago, I talked to Doug and others extensively, both on and off the record. I do not work for any of the candidates, and I don't advocate for anyone beyond my personal preferences, of which I have disclosed 4 of my preferences here and there in these posts. Doug is one of them, based on the overall probabilities of effectiveness in office.

To my point, Doug Findlater despises these forums for the same reasons I used to, that they are anonymous, backstabbing, sometimes slanderous comments by people who (mostly) do not have any accountability for their comments. I've become more pragmatic on the role and value of the Castanet forums, because I see they reach a slice of the audience, but I understand and intellectually agree with his thoughts on them, and his personal detesting and complete ignoring of them over the past year-plus. As I understand it, he used to take note of them, but now he won't even read them. If I were his media advisor, I'd be advising him to take a pragmatic approach too and engage himself constructively in them. But I'm not, and he hasn't asked me.

I don't think there's any more basis to condemn a candidate for not engaging in the forums than there is for not writing a letter to the editor for every negative comment someone expresses in the newspapers. It is possibly politically shortsighted in the new media age, but nothing else.

[canadman]

Personally I think the candidates, for their own sanity, are better off staying away from these things. It is entertaining and at times enlightening for most of us and certainly a great 'forum', so to speak for spirited and at times heated debate but I think it can also give a false sense of the community's pulse not to mention draw you into uncharacteristically nasty debates and arguments, the likes of which most of us wouldn't have or at least conduct the way we do on here in person.

This forum (at least the Westside political part of it) is dominated by I'd guess no more than 20 - 30 people. Almost every single post on here comes from those same 20 - 30 (of which you and I are 2). How accurate a reflection of voter's opinions community wide are those 20-30 views? Who knows. But I certainly wouldn't want to rely on this forum (or its polls for that matter) as a realistic gauge of community opinion.

So to candidates I say don't let the forums fool you. That's one thing I'll give credit to Doug Findlater for, avoiding the temptation to get involved on here and be drawn into the debates like Council candidate Jim Dixon and others.

Wish I had the restraint to do the same... Just can't pull myself away from it's magnetic pull!

[T. Rawlin]

I do believe I was deliberately misquoted................? Please, take at least a second look at what I wrote and you then highlighted Mr. When I stated, "..... in his efforts towards unification........" you distorted this to Mr. Haslock's claim that he had achieved unification. Please,let's be fair.

Cry wolf much? You appear to be afflicted with an overly developed sense of victimhood.

You were quoted exactly as written. If I take out the filler stuff, you wrote "The candidate ...was quite successful in his efforts towards unification of the various factions". I recognize that Peter Haslock did not say that, and my sarcasm was directed solely at you for what you said, not at Mr. Haslock.

[occasional thoughts]

The only thing that scares the poop out of me is that by disclosing I voted for Doug F for mayor, I'm admitting that I have at least one outlook in common with the Scottish pirhana. But I decided I wasn't going to let his pronouncements manipulate me out of voting for whom I believe is the best person for the job at this point in time.

[sellpro 46]

I think Peter may have been trying to illustrate his understanding of the situation and all the dynamics involved rather than appearing superficial by simply stating it the way you did.

For me personally, I found the detail confirming of Peter's broad understanding of the scope of the situation.

You do not appear to have disputed my point that he said nothing of substance. If having a candidate blather on in an attempt to make you feel warm and fuzzy is enough to get people like you to vote for them, then I can only hope that you are not typical of the Westside electorate.

I guess though that it's too bad for the rest of us that you waited so long to speak up. I'me sorry that you feel so venemous toward me but as always, you have yours and I have mine.

Respectfully,

[T. Rawlin]

But look at it this way hereiamagain, apparently we're not as good as steren, Urbane, gardengirl, Trainspotter, Fancy, etc... That couldn't have anything to do with their position on the candidates and the issues could it?

Look at the context, as I was discussing innuendo, accusations, and anonymous complaints, of which there has been an abundance directed towards Doug Findlater.

If you compare my list (hereiamagain, parachute, canadman, Bestside) to your list (steren, Urbane, gardengirl, Trainspotter, Fancy), you might notice that not many of the names on your list appear on threads like this one. In fact, most of the innuendo and accusations appear to originate with the names on my list.

Does that help clear things up for you?

By the way, I liked your post of 5:41pm on this thread. As long as you stay away from the emotionally clouded naming issue, your writing can be quite worth reading.

[T. Rawlin]

I guess though that it's too bad for the rest of us that you waited so long to speak up.

And your point is? Or did you neglect to include one yet again?

I'me sorry that you feel so venemous toward me but as always, you have yours and I have mine.

Actually,sellpro 46, I don't actually feel much of anything towards you. You simply don't interest me very much. I didn't care for what you wrote in your press release because it was meaningless fluff.

You're in politics. You'll have to grow a thicker skin, because I haven't even tried to be particularly caustic towards you.

[canadman]

T. Rawlins, I do agree that there has been a harsh nature to all the posts regarding the naming issue, some of mine included. I obviously have a fairly close attachment to the issue but nonetheless I agree that my tone along with others has probably suffered from getting carried away by the venomous back and forth escalation of the thread(s).

That's one of the reasons I've chosen not to post any further to the naming threads as of today. (a little late I know). It's too difficult at this point to be objective anymore. I really did try to be in the beginning but eventually, after enough punches you can't help but start punching back.

Anyway, back on track. I have to admit I knew nothing of Peter Haslock in the beginning. In fact I felt almost sorry for him for running against a name so well recognized as Doug Findlater's. Since that time however, through online messages, hearing him speak at forums and meeting him personally my opinion has changed dramatically.

I won't deny that my sense is (and I think if Peter's reading this he'll likely agree if I read him right) that he does lack political experience. It may well be that some of his posts are an attempt to speak out in a way he feels is the way politicians are supposed to sound and perhaps from time to time the result may come across sounding benign and a bit fluffy, but having met him and having heard him discuss issues both publicly and privately I have to say that his words on here may not be doing him justice.

I find him extremely smart and personable. I also feel a real sense of honesty to his answers. He doesn't appear (in person) to mince his words or attempt to 'appeal' to one group or another. He just comes across as a pragmatist, the type who can view the issues from a 10,000 foot level rather than get caught up in the bureaucracy of them.

It's worth noting as well that Doug Findlater, though he has been around politics in a bureaucratic sense for quite a few years has never actually been a politician until he won his Council seat last year. Though academically knowledgeable Doug Findlater has little more experience as a politician than Peter Haslock.

After my own experience, trust is a major determining factor when it comes to my vote. I simply can't bring myself to support a candidate who has broken my trust. I would rather take my chances with someone new than vote for someone who has already proven his willingness to be, well I'd call it underhanded but I know others don't see it that way so let's just say less than trustworthy.