There are some great posts in Al's Corner #14 from this morning. I know, I made some of them :-| . Continue the discussion here. RO said something GREAT:

I agree, that there's a significant difference between some conservatives (who, for example - are concerned about the significant increase in minors pursuing irreversible medical procedures to "change" their sex), vs. hatred toward a given community. But (not withstanding this particular example), it would be helpful if some of those same conservatives simultaneously acknowledged and rallied-against violence and hatred toward these communities.

This goes both ways. The problem is, the extremist lunatics on both sides are the most vocal (except for Al from Al's corner, who is vocal but both conservative and liberal and neither and both) and more moderate people who don't clue in to this think the world is ending and become extremists, and the result is crap like:

1) Donald Trump
2) Trump Derangement Syndrome

RO is right (as opposed to wrong, not left), but the problem is usually the vocal people are either extremist or partisan (same thing) and they literally DON'T have compassion for the other side (or won't admit it for political reasons).

Woe is us :-|

"In past years regarding "Giving Tuesday" (Kill Me), I would submit a comment to the Vanguard requesting that instead of people giving to the Vanguard, the Vanguard should give money back to the community in repentance so that it would cease to exist for the betterment of us all. This never got published, LOL."

Alan, that's something to ponder on this Turkey Day. Would the community be better off if there was no Vanguard? Personally, since I quit due to what I consider their often unfair and biased moderation policies, I know the time I spent (wasted) commenting on the Vanguard has been better spent elsewhere. For that I am thankful. Happy Thanksgiving everyone.

"Now, there is nothing left for me at the DV but a steaming pile of dog poo."

What, you don't like Trump is satan, DeSantis is evil and Reisig and the new target Jenkins are bad comments? But don't you dare say anything about Democrats...

RO: "I'm still commenting on the Vanguard, at least! (But, less than I used to.) I can't resist challenging the development advocacy - even at the expense of my own well-being"

SAVE YOURSELF !!!

"DOUBLE YOUR IMPACT WITH A DONATION TODAY: Support the Vanguard on #GivingTuesday"

. . . or . . . not . . .

"The Vanguard prides itself on helping to launch the careers of aspiring young attorneys, many of them young women of color."

Are the students writing the many articles for the Vanguard being paid a salary or at least a per article stipend? Asking for a friend...

RO: "Just what the world needs - more attorneys."

Just what the world needs - more young woke progressive activist attorneys, influenced by David Greenwald and his ilk.

SUBJECT: "Our Great Davis Schools Are in Trouble" by David M. Greenwald

"For a number of years I have been warning this community that the great Davis school system risks coming crashing down on our heads as we look the other way."

If the Davis school system is to come crashing DOWN on our heads, that would imply that it would be crashing down from ABOVE. So, to look the other way would be to be looking DOWN. I highly recommend that the people of Davis look at least HORIZONTALLY, as most do when walking or standing, as you are very likely to see the school system dropping from above and be able to get the F out of the way to avoid a skull fracture. Davis school systems are heavier that ACME bank vaults. And who are these people who walk around staring DOWNward?

And as for the 'great Davis school system', isn't that in itself the problem? We have a great school system, so people flock to our town from all over, including the cash-rich from the Bay Area, driving up housing prices and decreasing available housing that your typical Davis worker, student, or house-less person can afford. If our school system massively declined and actually began to SUCK, all those posh Bay Area transplants would abandon us for the great Zamora school system. Therefore, I advocate for reducing the pay of teachers, even further reducing the pay of administrators, and giving them a clear message to abandon our great school system so that it may deteriorate and thus, finally, allow Davis to have affordable housing prices.

[Alan C. Miller is today formally announcing his run for Davis School Board in the next election. Whenever that is :-| ]

The "edited" part had to do with what that particular author teaches (a dean/professor at UCD's school of law) - including critical race theory.

Might be viewed as "doxing", not sure. In any case, I didn't have any significant complaint about that being edited-out.

I'm more concerned about how political activism is "shaping" the educational system. Might even be viewed as "systemic activism".

UCD also has a YIMBY-type law professor, who is quite "active" as well. I'd argue that he is directly opposing slow-growthers and others concerned about their communities throughout the state.

I don't see any justification for public funding of political activism, especially when some view it as harmful.

RO - not sure I understand about the potential of doxxing by pointing out someone's affiliation who is public. Doxxing is giving out private information such as someone's home address (or geo-coordinates as happened to you in the DV).

I don't believe the tech company example is the same. The DV is a political blog with a specific (radical/extremist) point-of-view, that some have argued violates terms of their non-profit status. A tech company is just a tech company that students can learn from.

SUBJECT: "DOUBLE YOUR IMPACT WITH A DONATION TODAY: Support the Vanguard on #GivingTuesday"

November 30, 2022
Support the Vanguard on #GivingTuesday

Hate to break it to you Van Guard, but November 30th is a Wednesday. Giving Tuesday was yesterday. Hopefully nobody gave today. Tell me oh please God in Heaven that you didn't give today.

For now, I'm continuing to "give" to the Vanguard - in the form of hopefully-valid counter-arguments.

But it seems that there's increasingly-fewer supporters of the Vanguard to "push-against". And not much thought behind those who do (in regard to one commenter, in particular). (No, not McCann, who at least "tries" - when he's not engaging in personal attacks). I'd describe the commenter I'm referring to as essentially a mindless parrot, not even worth bothering with.

Even David Greenwald seems increasingly-disinterested in engaging. Just writes his articles, without much follow-up. Primarily allowing other (e.g., student) authors to write articles (regarding the criminal system), instead.

Perhaps that's the natural progression, when you're trying to build a business based upon the work of others - and expanding beyond Davis.

But (for me at least), I ultimately don't have much interest in debating the criminal justice system. And the student authors don't engage, regardless.

Hey, if "progressive" DAs find a way to make communities safer (and not safety just for criminals), I'm all for it. But, I'm highly skeptical of their ability to achieve success. For that matter, I haven't even seen any actual plan for them to achieve success.

Keith: I haven't had too much trouble with getting comments posted on the Vanguard lately, but I certainly don't want to support it, either.

Today, they had an article regarding "killer robots". (I suspect that there's a lot of information "missing" from that article, as it's automatically written from an "advocacy" point of view. As if a robot itself wrote the article.)

In any case, it seems that the Vanguard would prefer to ignore "Robot Landlords", and the impact that this type of thing has on the so-called "nationwide housing crisis":

https://www.vice.com/en/article/dy7eaw/robot-landlords-are-buying-up-houses

"Keith: I haven't had too much trouble with getting comments posted on the Vanguard lately, but I certainly don't want to support it, either."

Well that's good for you Ron. That wasn't my experience.

SUBJECT: "CAAP Debate Will Come in the Midst of Increasingly Bad News on the Climate Front"

Don Shor December 5, 2022 at 7:53 am

Plant more trees. Landscape around them. Irrigate landscapes where people live, work, and play.

Total coincidence that the author of this comment, also the moderator who's 'volunteer' job is now all but obsolete due to commenting policies that have all but killed comments - sells trees and landscaping. No conflict of interest there :-|

Of course, nobody reads the Vanguard anymore because without a robust and real comments section (now lacking opposing viewpoints and arseholes like myself now banned) it is Boringsville/Yawnsville. So even questionable if it's a conflict of interest if all but no one are reading it. If a tree falls in the forest (or someone promotes buying trees in Davis) and no one hears, is there a sound?

So Biden just traded Viktor Bout the "Merchant of Death" who is an international arms dealer that's responsible for untold deaths across the world for Brittney Griner's release from a Russian jail who had broken Russian drug law.

Biden did this while leaving Paul Whelan behind, an American and former Marine jailed in Russia for nearly two years under “espionage” charges in 2018. Whelan’s total sentence is 16 years.

Thoughts on this? What will be your thoughts when/if the Merchant of Death's release results in more loss of life?

"What will be your thoughts when/if the Merchant of Death's release results in more loss of life? "

Or when the policy of giving Putin way more than we get on an international political level results in Russia kidnapping another American civilian, and another, because Russia sees what suckers we are, and that 'it works' ? See 'why we don't pay for hostages' (except sometimes we do)

SUBJECT: "The City Needs to Revitalize the Downtown” (David Vanguard, 2022-12-12)

Colin Walsh December 12, 2022 at 9:42 am

https://www.onlyinyourstate.com/northern-california/best-main-streets-norcal/?fbclid=IwAR1VpRBYUJx5giYiB1ZbqqhAe17UVQG3ZH6JojXJjTNBWkrrwdezDr_AVTk

As the author Mr. Greenwald says, "I’m not sure they are really seeing what I see."

Yeah, most of us don't really see what you see, Mr. G..

Ever. On any subject.

"As the author Mr. Greenwald says, "I’m not sure they are really seeing what I see."

Yeah, most of us don't really see what you see, Mr. G..

Ever. On any subject."

LOL, I hope I never see what David sees.

Hey Alan, what's a story here, a story there, an extra 8 feet here, an extra 8 feet there? Here's part of the discussion that was put forward at the council meeting.

https://www.davisvanguard.org/2022/12/commentary-council-battles-over-building-heights-and-process-concerns-but-didnt-blink-in-the-end/

"Apparently one story for the neighbors made a huge difference."

"But as Arnold pointed out, “Once we get to this point in the discussion where we’re talking about one floor, eight feet with a setback, we’re really on the margins of that point.” He said, “It’s not like we’re deciding should it be two stories or should it be 50 stories.”

"He said, “I just don’t think that one floor is going to be the difference between the quality of a neighborhood or not.” He later added, “I mean, talking big cities, small towns, and I don’t come away ever from those experiences thinking, man, if it was just one floor shorter, we would sure have a nice neighborhood here.”

"Mayor Lucas Frerichs added, “if this is going to be allowed to be four stories” that with setbacks and such, “a fifth story is not something that is unreasonable.”

"So I'll simply say: "F*ck You, Greenwald"."

He's simply a blogger writing articles on his blog often giving his 'opinions' on issues. Yes he does have a bigger platform than most but it's still just his 'opinions' and they should carry no more weight than anyone else's 'opinions'. And you know what they say about 'opinions' and what they are like, everybody has one.

If neighbors are going to continue participating in these sham processes, perhaps they should put forth their own "straw man" proposals in regard to what they'll support.

For example, if you think that 4 floors is the most that the neighborhood can reasonably accommodate, tell the folks in charge that you can only support 3 - at most.

Same thing regarding additional parking demand (which neighborhoods will increasingly be "expected" to accommodate, as a result of these new developments). Claiming that new residents will be car-free (and therefore won't create demand simply by eliminating on-site parking requirements) is dishonest at best.

Give yourself some negotiating room, especially since these representatives aren't working on your behalf. However, given some of the comments emanating from the council, perhaps resident input doesn't even matter at all. In which case you might save yourself a lot of grief simply by not participating at all.

These days, it seems that residents no longer have an option to simply oppose changes that they believe will harm their neighborhoods. Those folks are simply eliminated from the "process", entirely.

Alternatively, voters could elect people who actually support existing residents in the first place, rather than some "phantom" future residents who wouldn't even exist were it not for these forced processes. Of course, they tell themselves and others that they're doing it for future (potential) residents, but they're not actually the ones pushing this. They're not even in the room or city at all, and some probably haven't even heard of Davis at this point.

Dave Hart December 16, 2022 at 10:22 pm

The Hibbert site could easily be six stories and work well there. Hopefully, the council will understand five or six stories is no big deal . . .

I see what you did there. The issue is between FOUR and FIVE stories, so to make your allegiance clear, and to attempt to make the case for four stories seem less reasonable, you threw out the idea of SIX stories!!!!! SIX!!!!!!! SIIIIIIIIIIIXXXXX!!!! Brilliant! Clever! Absolutely amazing! Have you considered a career in form-based code, civic planning, community process, or consensus building?

YAWN!!!!

Yet another housing insecurity article on the Vanguard today.

"What would David write about if he didn't have Ron and Ron feeding him ideas to use as a foil?"

Not much. Ron and Ron have yet to realize that their bringing gifts to the wizard is what is keeping the wizard alive.

"My mind to your mind, my thoughts to your thoughts . . . " -- Mr. Spock

Good points, though I think that some of "David and Company's" articles and arguments are so weak that even I (alone) can poke holes in them. Even if I'm limited to five comments, fighting-off David, Richard McCann's "approved" personal attacks, Don, and the "anti-choice" Ron. (Not sure if there's anyone else left on there, after Bill Marshall's passing.)

Honestly, I'm always a little in shock when someone whom I know (even just through a blog) dies. Especially since I'm still somewhat convinced that I'll live forever, and/or that the world never existed without me in the first place.

In any case, I figure that David is actually trying to influence the council, regardless of any comments.

As a side note, I actually have some respect for the "anti-choice" Ron, as he's simply trying to show what David's actual position is. (David has acknowledged that he wants to change Measure J, though I suspect that it might be more "honest" for him to take on the role of an "upfront" local blogger who supports disenfranchising voters. And is a supporter of the typical sprawl that occurs around the region.)

Instead, David's articles continue to try to (more-subtly) weaken support for Measure J. Maybe that's what you learn as a political science major?

At this point, I think Bob Dunning might be more on the "side" of slow-growthers than David Greenwald is.

Then again, David does claim to have worked against Covell Village. Maybe it's not too late to help him "see the light", again? :-)

In any case, discussing the Vanguard on here is almost the "same" as discussing the Vanguard on the Vanguard, itself.

Not the "same" at all.