Cranbury Forum | Bulletin | Info Sharing Â
[Click here to bookmark this page: http://cranbury.info]
â–ª
Cranbury School
â–ª
Cranbury Township
â–ª
Cranbury Library
â–ª
Cranbury.org
â–ª
Cranburyhistory.org
(Press Ctrl and = keys to increase font size)
Search
Register (optional)
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
[http://cranbury.info]
->
News | Events
Post a reply
Username
Subject
Message body
Emoticons
Font colour:
Default
Dark Red
Red
Orange
Brown
Yellow
Green
Olive
Cyan
Blue
Dark Blue
Indigo
Violet
White
Black
Font size:
Tiny
Small
Normal
Large
Huge
Close Tags
[quote="Guest"]If they pass the lame cat license, I think I'm going to cease getting a dog license and will def not be getting a cat license. Further proof that TC has no clue.[/quote]
Options
HTML is
ON
BBCode
is
ON
Smilies are
ON
Disable HTML in this post
Disable BBCode in this post
Disable Smilies in this post
All times are GMT - 4 Hours
Jump to:
Select a forum
Topics
----------------
News | Events
School | Parenting
Blogs by Cranbury Residents
Shopping | Good Deals | Price Talk
Home Sweet Home
House For Sale
Home Sales Pricing Records
Financial | Stocks | Mutual Funds
Cool Bytes & Bits
Garage Sale | ForSale Ads | Things to Trade
Tech Related (PC, Internet, HDTV, etc.)
Interesing and Fun Stuff to Share
What's Your Favorite?
Interests | Hobbies
Cranbury History
Radom Thoughts | Sports | Kitchen Sink
Amazon Deals
Local Business Info
----------------
Local Business Ads (FREE)
Support
----------------
Daily Sponsored Message & Amazon Ads
About Us | Your Privacy | Suggestion | Sponsored
Test Area (Practice your posting skills here)
Topic review
<table border="0" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1" width="100%" class="forumline"> <tr> <th class="thCornerL" width="22%" height="26">Author</th> <th class="thCornerR">Message</th> </tr> <tr> <td width="22%" align="left" valign="top" class="row1"><span class="name"><a name=""></a><b>James</b></span></td> <td class="row1" height="28" valign="top"><table width="100%" border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0"> <tr> <td width="100%"><img src="templates/subSilver/images/icon_minipost.gif" width="12" height="9" alt="Post" title="Post" border="0" /><span class="postdetails">Posted: Thu, Oct 16 2008, 10:24 pm EDT<span class="gen"> </span> Post subject: Re: Candidates for Cranbury TC Debate Tomorrow October 14 at 8:00 PM</span></td> </tr> <tr> <td colspan="2"><hr /></td> </tr> <tr> <td colspan="2"><span class="postbody">I don't know the answer, but can we do rental and owner in the same attached building? That would seem a logical step. My initial thought would be to have meetings with CHA and the homeowners and work out a proposed solution for the site that is fair for all concerned. Keep in mind, rental units have to be included in some form, but make it workable for all parties concerned. <br /> <br />When you build something close to the property line you usually need to get an easement and written approval from your neighbors. I don't think a housing development such as this should be any different in terms of resident input. Now, perhaps a solution can't be worked out, but I think every effort should be put forth considering the home is one's biggest investment.</span></td> </tr> </table></td> </tr> <tr> <td colspan="2" height="1" class="spaceRow"><img src="templates/subSilver/images/spacer.gif" alt="" width="1" height="1" /></td> </tr> <tr> <td width="22%" align="left" valign="top" class="row2"><span class="name"><a name=""></a><b>Jersey Dad</b></span></td> <td class="row2" height="28" valign="top"><table width="100%" border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0"> <tr> <td width="100%"><img src="templates/subSilver/images/icon_minipost.gif" width="12" height="9" alt="Post" title="Post" border="0" /><span class="postdetails">Posted: Thu, Oct 16 2008, 10:11 pm EDT<span class="gen"> </span> Post subject: Re: Candidates for Cranbury TC Debate Tomorrow October 14 at 8:00 PM</span></td> </tr> <tr> <td colspan="2"><hr /></td> </tr> <tr> <td colspan="2"><span class="postbody">There may be differences from town to town, but I have confirmed this directly with Cranbury's affordable housing folks. <br /> <br />I also learned tonight that 7 is the minimum possible number of rentals that must be built at the 130 D Site to qualify for maximum bonus credits. To allow for potential changes, we should probably do more than the minimum. However, there is definately an opportunity for an ownership/rentals mix at the 130 D Site. <br /> <br />I also learned that the 130 D Site is not a strong candidate for the "federal tax credits" that were discussed as a reason for choosing 100 percent rentals.</span></td> </tr> </table></td> </tr> <tr> <td colspan="2" height="1" class="spaceRow"><img src="templates/subSilver/images/spacer.gif" alt="" width="1" height="1" /></td> </tr> <tr> <td width="22%" align="left" valign="top" class="row1"><span class="name"><a name=""></a><b>Guest</b></span></td> <td class="row1" height="28" valign="top"><table width="100%" border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0"> <tr> <td width="100%"><img src="templates/subSilver/images/icon_minipost.gif" width="12" height="9" alt="Post" title="Post" border="0" /><span class="postdetails">Posted: Thu, Oct 16 2008, 4:48 pm EDT<span class="gen"> </span> Post subject: Re: Candidates for Cranbury TC Debate Tomorrow October 14 at 8:00 PM</span></td> </tr> <tr> <td colspan="2"><hr /></td> </tr> <tr> <td colspan="2"><span class="postbody">Interesting because when we raised the issue we were told that HOA's were not permissible. I wonder if it's the wording and obligations that the HOA has in terms of restrictions.</span></td> </tr> </table></td> </tr> <tr> <td colspan="2" height="1" class="spaceRow"><img src="templates/subSilver/images/spacer.gif" alt="" width="1" height="1" /></td> </tr> <tr> <td width="22%" align="left" valign="top" class="row2"><span class="name"><a name=""></a><b>Guest</b></span></td> <td class="row2" height="28" valign="top"><table width="100%" border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0"> <tr> <td width="100%"><img src="templates/subSilver/images/icon_minipost.gif" width="12" height="9" alt="Post" title="Post" border="0" /><span class="postdetails">Posted: Thu, Oct 16 2008, 4:17 pm EDT<span class="gen"> </span> Post subject: Re: Candidates for Cranbury TC Debate Tomorrow October 14 at 8:00 PM</span></td> </tr> <tr> <td colspan="2"><hr /></td> </tr> <tr> <td colspan="2"><span class="postbody"></span><table width="90%" cellspacing="1" cellpadding="3" border="0" align="center"><tr> <td><span class="genmed"><b>Quote:</b></span></td> </tr> <tr> <td class="quote">Bergen, Danser and South Main are almost all ownership units and they have HOAs. CHA has a seat on the HOA boards. These developments are extremely well maintained. </td> </tr></table><span class="postbody"> <br /> <br />I agree with the above statement. I favor those kinds of ownership units over rental units.</span></td> </tr> </table></td> </tr> <tr> <td colspan="2" height="1" class="spaceRow"><img src="templates/subSilver/images/spacer.gif" alt="" width="1" height="1" /></td> </tr> <tr> <td width="22%" align="left" valign="top" class="row1"><span class="name"><a name=""></a><b>Jersey Dad</b></span></td> <td class="row1" height="28" valign="top"><table width="100%" border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0"> <tr> <td width="100%"><img src="templates/subSilver/images/icon_minipost.gif" width="12" height="9" alt="Post" title="Post" border="0" /><span class="postdetails">Posted: Thu, Oct 16 2008, 3:52 pm EDT<span class="gen"> </span> Post subject: Re: Candidates for Cranbury TC Debate Tomorrow October 14 at 8:00 PM</span></td> </tr> <tr> <td colspan="2"><hr /></td> </tr> <tr> <td colspan="2"><span class="postbody">Bergen, Danser and South Main are almost all ownership units and they have HOAs. CHA has a seat on the HOA boards. These developments are extremely well maintained. <br /> <br />Evicting a renter from publicly subsidized housing is nearly impossible, just ask CHA. The best we can do is minimize risks on the front end and keep churn low. <br /> <br />Keep in mind the increase in opportunities for criminals does not necessarily come from the residents of affordable housing, it comes from a lack of familiarity among neighbors that is inherent in transient communities of all income levels.</span></td> </tr> </table></td> </tr> <tr> <td colspan="2" height="1" class="spaceRow"><img src="templates/subSilver/images/spacer.gif" alt="" width="1" height="1" /></td> </tr> <tr> <td width="22%" align="left" valign="top" class="row2"><span class="name"><a name=""></a><b>Guest</b></span></td> <td class="row2" height="28" valign="top"><table width="100%" border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0"> <tr> <td width="100%"><img src="templates/subSilver/images/icon_minipost.gif" width="12" height="9" alt="Post" title="Post" border="0" /><span class="postdetails">Posted: Thu, Oct 16 2008, 3:11 pm EDT<span class="gen"> </span> Post subject: Re: Candidates for Cranbury TC Debate Tomorrow October 14 at 8:00 PM</span></td> </tr> <tr> <td colspan="2"><hr /></td> </tr> <tr> <td colspan="2"><span class="postbody">I want to clarify my previous post about my experiences. My understanding is that owned units cannot have a HOA or similar rules placed on them. That was why we saw problems. The reason being that a HOA has certain legalities which is fine if people sign off on them as a knowing buyer, but the COAH people would not be able to do so volunatrily as it would be do it or lose it. So under COAH there can't be the HOA restriction for owned property. That's what caused the issue. <br /> <br />However, with rentals the town was able to place rules as the property was town owned and lawns maintained by the town. There was no reduction of property owner rights. <br /> <br />In terms of cost, it is a higher maintence cost on rentals, but IMO is valid because we don't have to look at eye sores or potential eyesores and can get rid of people who pose a risk. Under homeownership we have to hope for the person to sell or be arrested.</span></td> </tr> </table></td> </tr> <tr> <td colspan="2" height="1" class="spaceRow"><img src="templates/subSilver/images/spacer.gif" alt="" width="1" height="1" /></td> </tr> <tr> <td width="22%" align="left" valign="top" class="row1"><span class="name"><a name=""></a><b>Jersey Dad</b></span></td> <td class="row1" height="28" valign="top"><table width="100%" border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0"> <tr> <td width="100%"><img src="templates/subSilver/images/icon_minipost.gif" width="12" height="9" alt="Post" title="Post" border="0" /><span class="postdetails">Posted: Thu, Oct 16 2008, 2:49 pm EDT<span class="gen"> </span> Post subject: Re: Candidates for Cranbury TC Debate Tomorrow October 14 at 8:00 PM</span></td> </tr> <tr> <td colspan="2"><hr /></td> </tr> <tr> <td colspan="2"><span class="postbody">Win, <br />I appreciate your response, but I hope you re-consider. As the guest-poster pointed out, a properly formed home owners association would address the exterior property maintainence issues that were described (See Bergen Drive as an example of how this works effectively). The fact is, there is an overwhelming evidence to support that transient communities (of all income levels) are less desirable for a lot of reasons, including that they increase opportunities for criminals. <br /> <br />Also, when you consider this issue from a financial perspective, Cranbury could generate millions of dollars by selling the "20 or so" units that exceed the cap. Plus, rental units have higher operational costs and potentially higher infrastructural costs. By building the "20 or so" ownership units at the 130 D site (possibly along side some rental units), Cranbury could still qualify for federal tax credits at the other two sites identified in the plan. <br /> <br />In short, I understand the township's decision to build rental units to qualify for COAH credits, but it seems like a poor decision to <span style="font-weight: bold">exceed</span> the cap for rental credits. I am advocating that the "20 or so" units that can be designated as ownership units <span style="font-weight: bold">without reducing bonus credits</span>, be built at the 130 D Site. In my opinion, this decision would be better for my neighborhood and the town.</span></td> </tr> </table></td> </tr> <tr> <td colspan="2" height="1" class="spaceRow"><img src="templates/subSilver/images/spacer.gif" alt="" width="1" height="1" /></td> </tr> <tr> <td width="22%" align="left" valign="top" class="row2"><span class="name"><a name=""></a><b>wcody</b></span></td> <td class="row2" height="28" valign="top"><table width="100%" border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0"> <tr> <td width="100%"><img src="templates/subSilver/images/icon_minipost.gif" width="12" height="9" alt="Post" title="Post" border="0" /><span class="postdetails">Posted: Thu, Oct 16 2008, 2:04 pm EDT<span class="gen"> </span> Post subject: Re: Candidates for Cranbury TC Debate Tomorrow October 14 at 8:00 PM</span></td> </tr> <tr> <td colspan="2"><hr /></td> </tr> <tr> <td colspan="2"><span class="postbody">In response to some of the comments here regarding the debate: <br /> <br />I do support the blog. I think it is a great place to share and receive information on Cranbury. The blogs is one of several different ways of receiving input. I do not like anonymous personal attack postings although I don’t think that is a big issue here. Most of the posts are professional and I get valuable information from reading them. One thing regarding anonymous posts, it is sometimes hard to gauge how prevalent a view is, many posts could be coming from the same person. Getting feedback from directly from someone whether it is in person, a letter, an email or at the township meeting carries more weight than an anonymous comment, although, I do understand the need to sometimes post anonymously. One person I have seen comment quite frequently is Mr. or Ms. Guest, I have been walking the entire town and I am sorry that I have not met them yet. <br /> <br />I do not think rental units are inherently worse than ownership units. In fact, in walking through town, I have met great people in the rental units. I like the fact that we receive bonus credit and potentially some funding for these units. I hope we find ways that we do not need to build our max commitment and would fully be able to take advantage of the bonus credits. I found the comments enlightening from the poster who lived in Monroe regarding their experience with ownership units (a good example of a productive anonymous post). <br /> <br />Win Cody</span></td> </tr> </table></td> </tr> <tr> <td colspan="2" height="1" class="spaceRow"><img src="templates/subSilver/images/spacer.gif" alt="" width="1" height="1" /></td> </tr> <tr> <td width="22%" align="left" valign="top" class="row1"><span class="name"><a name=""></a><b>Guest</b></span></td> <td class="row1" height="28" valign="top"><table width="100%" border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0"> <tr> <td width="100%"><img src="templates/subSilver/images/icon_minipost.gif" width="12" height="9" alt="Post" title="Post" border="0" /><span class="postdetails">Posted: Thu, Oct 16 2008, 6:54 am EDT<span class="gen"> </span> Post subject: Re: Candidates for Cranbury TC Debate Tomorrow October 14 at 8:00 PM</span></td> </tr> <tr> <td colspan="2"><hr /></td> </tr> <tr> <td colspan="2"><span class="postbody">Here's my view on rentals having seen both sides when I lived elsewhere. <br /> <br />On ownership, we had units that the people neglected. Lawns weren't cared for, toys dumped in the front yard, one neighbor was verbally abusive and when we asked the town were told it's their home just like anyone else's. <br /> <br />On rentals, the town maintains the outside so there is no issue with looks. They had restrictions on the outside much like a HOA, lawns were mowed in the front, fenced in back. Also, when there was one issue with a neighbor, not sure, but police were there he was gone within the year. I think COAH eviction may be easier due to the fact that the state wants to keep the houses in stock vs a private landlord. Just my take given the departure. <br /> <br />With any home you can't foresee who moves into it whether it's owned or not. The issue in monroe the guy owned his home. I'm personally for rentals because we know the house won't be neglected outside, if there are issues it's much easier to evict them then it is someone who owns the home, and it maintains the COAH home indefinitely, plus adds the credits.</span></td> </tr> </table></td> </tr> <tr> <td colspan="2" height="1" class="spaceRow"><img src="templates/subSilver/images/spacer.gif" alt="" width="1" height="1" /></td> </tr> <tr> <td width="22%" align="left" valign="top" class="row2"><span class="name"><a name=""></a><b>Jersey Dad</b></span></td> <td class="row2" height="28" valign="top"><table width="100%" border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0"> <tr> <td width="100%"><img src="templates/subSilver/images/icon_minipost.gif" width="12" height="9" alt="Post" title="Post" border="0" /><span class="postdetails">Posted: Wed, Oct 15 2008, 11:47 pm EDT<span class="gen"> </span> Post subject: Re: Candidates for Cranbury TC Debate Tomorrow October 14 at 8:00 PM</span></td> </tr> <tr> <td colspan="2"><hr /></td> </tr> <tr> <td colspan="2"><span class="postbody"></span><table width="90%" cellspacing="1" cellpadding="3" border="0" align="center"><tr> <td><span class="genmed"><b>Guest wrote:</b></span></td> </tr> <tr> <td class="quote">There are at least 3 arguments for having 100% rentals, if my understanding is correct. First being that CHA has more control over the property if rented. </td> </tr></table><span class="postbody"> <br /> <br />I've heard that, but I'm not sure what they mean by "more control". When I have pressed the issue, I have not found this to be the case. CHA is not allowed to exclude or evict renters on the basis of criminal records or activities. The qualification process is essentially a credit app and verification of low/mod income. Also, the eviction process in NJ is nearly impossible. <br /> <br /></span><table width="90%" cellspacing="1" cellpadding="3" border="0" align="center"><tr> <td><span class="genmed"><b>Guest wrote:</b></span></td> </tr> <tr> <td class="quote">Second, currently after 30 years, a unit that is owned can be sold at market value and that person can reap a windfall profit at taxpayer's expense (there are some rules regarding this - I think it's the second seller that gets the windfall.) When this unit is sold it may trigger a requirement that a new affordable unit be built.</td> </tr></table><span class="postbody"> <br /> <br />I believe this is correct. However, the township gets the revenue from selling the units on the front end. Plus, I'm not sure anyone can predict affordable housing policy 30 years from now. <br /> <br /></span><table width="90%" cellspacing="1" cellpadding="3" border="0" align="center"><tr> <td><span class="genmed"><b>Guest wrote:</b></span></td> </tr> <tr> <td class="quote">Third, if an owned unit goes into foreclosure, it becomes a market unit owned by the bank. It no longer counts toward our obligation.</td> </tr></table><span class="postbody"> <br /> <br />I've read this, too. However, there may be ways to protect against this. <br /> <br /></span><table width="90%" cellspacing="1" cellpadding="3" border="0" align="center"><tr> <td><span class="genmed"><b>Guest wrote:</b></span></td> </tr> <tr> <td class="quote">Also, I was under the impression that rentals count more towards bonus than owned units.</td> </tr></table><span class="postbody"> <br /> <br />True, but only to a point. There is a cap on bonus credits. Our COAH consultant noted we are overbuilding our rental bonus cap. We are planning to build more rentals than we get extra credit for (by an estimated 20 units). Even COAH officials said "if we didn't offer bonus credits (for rentals) municipalities wouldn't build them." <br /> <br />There are lots of reasons to support building ownership units vs. rentals units, provided we don't reduce bonus credits. It may make sense to discuss rentals vs. owners as its own thread.</span></td> </tr> </table></td> </tr> <tr> <td colspan="2" height="1" class="spaceRow"><img src="templates/subSilver/images/spacer.gif" alt="" width="1" height="1" /></td> </tr> <tr> <td width="22%" align="left" valign="top" class="row1"><span class="name"><a name=""></a><b>Guest</b></span></td> <td class="row1" height="28" valign="top"><table width="100%" border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0"> <tr> <td width="100%"><img src="templates/subSilver/images/icon_minipost.gif" width="12" height="9" alt="Post" title="Post" border="0" /><span class="postdetails">Posted: Wed, Oct 15 2008, 9:28 am EDT<span class="gen"> </span> Post subject: Re: Candidates for Cranbury TC Debate Tomorrow October 14 at 8:00 PM</span></td> </tr> <tr> <td colspan="2"><hr /></td> </tr> <tr> <td colspan="2"><span class="postbody"></span><table width="90%" cellspacing="1" cellpadding="3" border="0" align="center"><tr> <td><span class="genmed"><b>debate wrote:</b></span></td> </tr> <tr> <td class="quote">anonymous posting with negative personal attacks being a concern.</td> </tr></table><span class="postbody"> <br /> <br />That's why it's anonymous. I always take personal attacks with a grain of salt. <br /> <br />This place is best for info sharing; I learn much about the issues facing the town here.</span></td> </tr> </table></td> </tr> <tr> <td colspan="2" height="1" class="spaceRow"><img src="templates/subSilver/images/spacer.gif" alt="" width="1" height="1" /></td> </tr> <tr> <td width="22%" align="left" valign="top" class="row2"><span class="name"><a name=""></a><b>James</b></span></td> <td class="row2" height="28" valign="top"><table width="100%" border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0"> <tr> <td width="100%"><img src="templates/subSilver/images/icon_minipost.gif" width="12" height="9" alt="Post" title="Post" border="0" /><span class="postdetails">Posted: Wed, Oct 15 2008, 9:26 am EDT<span class="gen"> </span> Post subject: Re: Candidates for Cranbury TC Debate Tomorrow October 14 at 8:00 PM</span></td> </tr> <tr> <td colspan="2"><hr /></td> </tr> <tr> <td colspan="2"><span class="postbody">As I said, I want to be fair and objective. I did some research in the meeting notes and now am concerned and confused. The babe ruth league has rules stating how the field is used and access granted a least that's what I am told, I have asked them for copies of the rules. It's mainly due to ensuring the field remains in top condition and has limited play. Similar to HS football fields which are often locked down when not in use. However, I pulled this comment from the meeting notes of the TC. <br /> <br /><span style="font-weight: bold"> Ms. XX spoke concerning the baseball field and asked if it would be used only for the Little League. Ms. Stave responded, the field will be a regulation size baseball field. Presently the Township does not have a regulation size baseball field and first and foremost the field is being built to satisfy the need of the School as presently the girls softball league plays on the field at Village Park. The boys’ team uses the present baseball field. Once the new field is built, the girls’ team will then be able to play on the baseball field at the School as well. The field will also accommodate Babe Ruth Leagues and would be community based and for pick- up teams as well. There being no further comments, the Mayor closed the public part of the meeting.</span> <br /> <br />Okay, so now I'm confused. The league says one thing and the town says another. Is the town simply using babe ruth as a general term? If so, it's fine and problem solved concerning access. They don't seem to be saying that since they say the field will be used for league games. So, I think we need to get the league and TC on the same page in writing saying town residents will have access to play pick up games and the like. <br /> <br />My only concern is ensuring costs are controlled and making sure it's usable for all residents and that we maintain control.</span></td> </tr> </table></td> </tr> <tr> <td colspan="2" height="1" class="spaceRow"><img src="templates/subSilver/images/spacer.gif" alt="" width="1" height="1" /></td> </tr> <tr> <td width="22%" align="left" valign="top" class="row1"><span class="name"><a name=""></a><b>Guest</b></span></td> <td class="row1" height="28" valign="top"><table width="100%" border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0"> <tr> <td width="100%"><img src="templates/subSilver/images/icon_minipost.gif" width="12" height="9" alt="Post" title="Post" border="0" /><span class="postdetails">Posted: Wed, Oct 15 2008, 9:25 am EDT<span class="gen"> </span> Post subject: Re: Candidates for Cranbury TC Debate Tomorrow October 14 at 8:00 PM</span></td> </tr> <tr> <td colspan="2"><hr /></td> </tr> <tr> <td colspan="2"><span class="postbody">Regarding comments on the 130 site being 100% rentals. <br /> <br />There are at least 3 arguments for having 100% rentals, if my understanding is correct. First being that CHA has more control over the property if rented. <br /> <br />Second, currently after 30 years, a unit that is owned can be sold at market value and that person can reap a windfall profit at taxpayer's expense (there are some rules regarding this - I think it's the second seller that gets the windfall.) When this unit is sold it may trigger a requirement that a new affordable unit be built. <br /> <br />Third, if an owned unit goes into foreclosure, it becomes a market unit owned by the bank. It no longer counts toward our obligation. <br /> <br />Also, I was under the impression that rentals count more towards bonus than owned units. <br /> <br />On the ballfield, I think it's ridiculous that after all this time, it is still not clear what the rules are as to who can use it and when. Who can and will clarify this publicly? <br /> <br />I am also concerned about anonymous attacks. This should be used as a forum for discussion and information. Disagreements are fine, but attacks are not.</span></td> </tr> </table></td> </tr> <tr> <td colspan="2" height="1" class="spaceRow"><img src="templates/subSilver/images/spacer.gif" alt="" width="1" height="1" /></td> </tr> <tr> <td width="22%" align="left" valign="top" class="row2"><span class="name"><a name=""></a><b>debate</b></span></td> <td class="row2" height="28" valign="top"><table width="100%" border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0"> <tr> <td width="100%"><img src="templates/subSilver/images/icon_minipost.gif" width="12" height="9" alt="Post" title="Post" border="0" /><span class="postdetails">Posted: Wed, Oct 15 2008, 8:56 am EDT<span class="gen"> </span> Post subject: Re: Candidates for Cranbury TC Debate Tomorrow October 14 at 8:00 PM</span></td> </tr> <tr> <td colspan="2"><hr /></td> </tr> <tr> <td colspan="2"><span class="postbody">anonymous posting with negative personal attacks being a concern.</span></td> </tr> </table></td> </tr> <tr> <td colspan="2" height="1" class="spaceRow"><img src="templates/subSilver/images/spacer.gif" alt="" width="1" height="1" /></td> </tr> <tr> <td width="22%" align="left" valign="top" class="row1"><span class="name"><a name=""></a><b>debate</b></span></td> <td class="row1" height="28" valign="top"><table width="100%" border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0"> <tr> <td width="100%"><img src="templates/subSilver/images/icon_minipost.gif" width="12" height="9" alt="Post" title="Post" border="0" /><span class="postdetails">Posted: Wed, Oct 15 2008, 8:55 am EDT<span class="gen"> </span> Post subject: Re: Candidates for Cranbury TC Debate Tomorrow October 14 at 8:00 PM</span></td> </tr> <tr> <td colspan="2"><hr /></td> </tr> <tr> <td colspan="2"><span class="postbody">Yes, they both stated that they agreed on anonymous posting being a concern. Win did say that the blog had limited occurances of this and that it was pretty good. However, he was concerned about the potential and some instances of attack. John said that and raised the issue you highlighted of not putting credence into the comments. That was not a Win position. I stand by my interpretation.</span></td> </tr> </table></td> </tr> <tr> <td colspan="2" height="1" class="spaceRow"><img src="templates/subSilver/images/spacer.gif" alt="" width="1" height="1" /></td> </tr> <tr> <td width="22%" align="left" valign="top" class="row2"><span class="name"><a name=""></a><b>Guest</b></span></td> <td class="row2" height="28" valign="top"><table width="100%" border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0"> <tr> <td width="100%"><img src="templates/subSilver/images/icon_minipost.gif" width="12" height="9" alt="Post" title="Post" border="0" /><span class="postdetails">Posted: Wed, Oct 15 2008, 8:43 am EDT<span class="gen"> </span> Post subject: Re: Candidates for Cranbury TC Debate Tomorrow October 14 at 8:00 PM</span></td> </tr> <tr> <td colspan="2"><hr /></td> </tr> <tr> <td colspan="2"><span class="postbody">"Cranbury info. Ritter made it clear he reads the site by his attack on comments posted. He said he opposes it strongly. He was angry in his tone. Win said he supported the site and would use it to guage opinion on matters." <br /> <br /> <br />I disagree with this summary. I think both John and Win (rightfully) expressed reluctance in placing too much credibility in anonymous posts or entering into an online debate with an individual that has the option to remain anonymous. The sentiment was that an anonymous poster need not be accountable for his or her words and may be inclined to write things that they would not say in person. I agree with both candidates' positions on this. <br /> <br />I did not view John's tone - or Win's - as being angry at all.</span></td> </tr> </table></td> </tr> <tr> <td colspan="2" height="1" class="spaceRow"><img src="templates/subSilver/images/spacer.gif" alt="" width="1" height="1" /></td> </tr> </table>
Search
Register (optional)
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
Search
Register (optional)
Log in to check your private messages
Log in