BDG, I don't disapprove of private people, but you are not really being private. You are commenting in a public arena. If you want to be private, stay private. I suspect that what some anonymous commenters want in fact is to take no responsibility for their comments.
And there are other options for you. You can start an anonymous blog. You can go to craigslist or some other similar site. You can express your opinions in your private circle of friends. Or send your comments to whatever politicians you think should hear them. But don't pretend that you are being private when all who read City News online can see your comments. That is public.
(Democracy has several corners upon which stones must be laid.)
Actually, a cornerstone of democracy is the secret ballot — i.e., it is universally held that democracy depends upon the power of individuals NOT to have to declare themselves publicly.
In any event, conflating a web site's comments policy with NSA snooping and PAC donor disclosure seems a bit of a stretch, to put it mildly.
You're free to disapprove of private people, and to urge them to be more like you. The question, however, is whether their views must be excluded.
"Leonard Redon is a valued member of my team who is doing good work on behalf of the people of Rochester."
It's just a goshdarn shame that the important work he is doing does not include trying to be personally responsible enough to keep those people safe on our streets! Spencer Ash, Reggie Hill, and now Leonard Redon. Can the city of Rochester employ some kind of early warning system so that we know when members of this administration are behind the wheel?
There are two main reasons why I dislike this anonymity:
Political: The growing anonymity and secrecy in American culture is dangerous for democracy, whether it is City’s online comments or large anonymous PACS funded by contributions from anonymous uber-wealthy conservatives or secret surveillance of American’s online habits. The overall impact of this secrecy is to increase a culture of fear, and of the need to remain anonymous. Our democracy is dependent on the power of individuals to stand openly before other individuals to say, “This is what I believe. What do you believe?” But now we see this anonymity creeping into the realm of government via Patty Malgieri’s alleged involvement in some creepy mailings. Is it wrong for her, but not wrong for us? What kind of America and government do we want?
Personal: Look, I approach this as an openly gay man, who in the very distant past decided to connect my name and my face to the most personal aspects of my soul and being, despite whatever hatred awaited me. And I have discovered, as have so many of my friends, that this disclosure is a life-affirming and spiritually positive decision with unanticipated rewards and recognitions. And that courageous collective action of so many in my community is transforming our society for the better. So why would I want to be anonymous now, when disclosure has done so much good for me and for my community?
Anonymous posters: I suggest you look inside and break out of your own closets, constructed of whatever fears you have assembled there and participate fully in our open American society that is so critical for us to protect.
My apologies for the mistake! The Arts Council has been in the Neighborhood of the Arts for more than 30 years, and at their current location for 13. Thank you for your comment, Ms. Dawson.
While I agree that the US's (and Europe's) response to the crisis has been ill conceived, your defense of the people of Crimea's right to self-determination seems a bit naive. How can their cries for self-determination be taken seriously when only a slim majority of their citizens are ethnic Russians and when this cry of freedom suddenly rang out when Crimea was full of Russian troops. I'm sure the Tatars and the Ukrainians who live there don't feel the same way.
City Newspaper is encouraging people to betray their friends and employers. This type of venting may make someone feel better, but it's not right.
There are lots of people out there pretending that they are NOT somebody. How do I have meaningful conversations with them?
Give me anonymity or give me death! The Democrat & Chronicle did away with anonymous comments and only allows them from those with Facebook accounts. The result was pretty much the end of all comments. Bob Lonsberry allows anonymous comments and has no problems.
Many people can’t use their own names because of possible repercussions with friends, family and at their workplace. Editors will need to monitor comments but it’s a small price to pay for stimulating and meaningful discussion.
My only suggestion would be to have some simple rules for pseudonyms: Don’t use real names of politicians, celebrities and the like. It detracts from the comments by implying the named person would support a position, or it attempts to damage someone’s good name.
It truly is up to the mayor Howard to make the decision. If she chooses to take over the district as mayor, that choice would be hers and give her the controlling interest. Should the mayor model Buffalo and the other, she would first make that decision and then provide the way to do it in Rochester. Why does Rochester, NY need a state takeover of their school district? They should opt for a City Mayoral takeover and establish a qualified sub section/agency in city government to run it.
It is time to end anonymous comments. It IS important where the comments come from. Ray Levato puts his name at the end. So does Mary Anna Towler and everyone else at City Newspaper.
If it is worth saying it IS worth signing.
Remember the article about the "anonymous" package sent to the D&C about Van White's problems. What irrelevant nonsense it all turned out to be.
City Newspaper should be taking the moral high ground here.
Why would they not merge with the successful Landmark Society? It makes no sense to have so many of these societies...
I personally would prefer not to create yet another account, as I already have 10 million...
Does ANYBODY bother to fact check these days? The Arts Council has been at Village Gate approx. 13 years - not 30! And where has the board been these years? How can any organization be allowed to run in the red at this one has done? Glossy magazine to increase membership? What ab out the old fashioned way of trying to keep active members from falling away? I haven't had a request for renewal in about a dozen years. The director should have been fired some time ago. The larger question: should the Arts Council be allowed to continue? Ort should its re-grant duties be fulfilled by a division of the Rochester Foundation and save all lthe money of office space?
A shame to see this happen. It was a quality effort.
Contrary to one of the comments, it is not the case that a business "cannot discriminate against any group for any reason". In reality, no statute and no court says any such thing.
This same comment further claims that the Establishment clause of the First Amendment means that a private individual or business "cannot use a religious argument to justify discrimination." This is exactly backwards, inasmuch as the First Amendment constrains the state, not individuals, and is the foundation for any argument FOR religious exemptions.
There will be more coming. The days of pointing fingers and tinkering are over.
This will give the mayor permission to get more directly involved and we will see charters going into these RCSD buildings. All of the adults can cry about it but it might be the best thing that could happen in terms of helping the students themselves.
I can't wait to see Don Mancuso and DDrive!!! I love them. There is so much talent in that band!
Your argument is specious.
This is not a religious argument, it is a civil rights argument. If a business does business with the public, it cannot discriminate against any group for any reason. Our courts have upheld this many times.
You argument is the same which was used against Irish Americans in the late 19th century, Italian Americans in the early 20th century, and against African Americans until the late 20th century (although many would argue that this discrimination continues in many forms).
You advocate discrimination against one group of citizens. Our laws now prohibit this.
Additionally, our Constitution, as you reference, clearly states the separation of church and state in the first Amendment. You cannot use a religious argument to justify discrimination.
Some of you might recall that I complimented City Newspaper reporter, Tim Macaluso for getting it right regarding the potential paper-tiger-subterfuge, which Board of Education Commissioner and president Van White is attempting to run on the community. See the COMMENTS portion of the article at following link:
I had also noted in my above referenced COMMENTS, that "at times, I have been among City Newspaper reporter Tim Macaluso's biggest critics." Well, this article represents a classic example of why I frequently criticize Mr. Macaluso's reporting. Sometimes it's difficult to determine if the guy is really paying attention to what's going on around him, or if he is just plain dauncey, or a shrewd and calculating operative who formulates his reports in a manner aimed at soliciting specific types of responses.
For example, why would any education reporter write: "It’s hard to imagine why Warren would leave lawmakers in other parts of the state to decide what’s best for Rochester’s students, or why lawmakers would take action of such magnitude on their own." This guy is kidding, right? I mean, first of all, even though I'm sure they would confer with her, ultimately it's not up to Mayor Warren whether or not "lawmakers in other parts of the state [specifically, in Albany] decide [that] what’s best for Rochester’s students" is for the State to take control. Anyone who has been paying attention knows that there have been ongoing discussions for many months, if not years, regarding the possibility of a State-takeover of public schools in both Rochester and Buffalo, and we know, with regard to governance --- "lawmakers [and policymakers] in other parts of the state [specifically in Albany, i.e., the New York State Board of Regents and New York State Legislature actually have the power to] decide what’s best for Rochester’s students." So, what is this guy talking about? Is his question simply a matter of being uninformed, dauncey, or shrewd and calculating? Does anyone know?
Despite its successes, the Rochester region still has its share of environmental problems.
Website powered by Foundation