Friday's Seven Quick Takes had very low page views, I specifically made seven positive comments. I liked the post. I wish I could write more posts like that, but being positive doesn't generate page views.
Not sure what to make out of this mess. It's a mess. It's true, Gerry Nutter accepts receiving it as much as he gives it out with his choice of words. That's the problem. Yes, he is free to express himself as much as he wants. But 'dishing it out' with over the top responses, leads to this crap and turns people away from having conversations. Instead we indirectly defend the bad behavior to defend others connected to the mess, and accusing the others of wrongdoing for acknowledging bad behavior.
For those who choose to be politically engaged, and want to increase the number of people to be politically engaged (like being on an Election Commission) this type of language does not encourage civic/civil participation. But maybe it does, because everyone loves a train wreck. Train wrecks increases web traffic. Destructive ranting gets attention, constructive discussion does not.
A city council candidate knocked on my door this afternoon. The candidate asked if I could encourage more people to vote (not specifically that candidate), because we have low voter participation. I informed the candidate, that I could not do such a thing due to recent events. Maybe in two weeks, but not right now.
We had a nice conversation. I'm going to vote for that person. I'm not going to name the candidate, because it was so positive and this post is about being negative. If you want positive. I can be positive.
so how is it that gerry nutter can spew the foulest of insults against over half the electorate, that quite clearly call into question his ability to discern and respect the importance of those citizens relative to others, and the only thing we're debating is whether he can play nice with the partisan politicos? -Kad barma