Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 16 to 28 of 28

Thread: Wayland Voters Network (WVN) goes "off mission"

  1. #16
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    726

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff Baron View Post
    By the way, I really don't appreciate the insinuation that I made this up, Kim.
    Jeff, I'm not insinuating anything. The circumstances you describe are hard to imagine. I am not saying you made it up. I am saying the sum total of the whole thing just doesn't make sense.

    Possibilities here (and let me know if I am missing any):

    Taken as a given: a home on JB's route to Claypit sported both a Bladon sign and a Kinney sign

    Possibility #1: the homeowner supported both Kinney and Bladon (as described in the signs) -- this is what would make the most intuitive sense, but then we'd need to understand why the homeowner seems to have lied or mislead Mr. Baron into thinking the signs were some kind of trick (or possibly there was just a miscommunication or misunderstanding between Mr. Baron and the homeowner)

    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff Baron View Post
    I went so far as to ask the homeowner who was outside at the time why it was there, and was told it was done that way to "throw off SOS folks into believing this was the supported combo."
    Possibility #2: the homeowner supported Kinney and Bustin, but was willing to sacrifice Bustin to try to trick some voters into voting for Kinney. That seems a little extreme behavior, but sounds like what the homeowner was describing to Mr. Baron. This behavior I would call "bad sportsmanship" (and would be altogether ineffective if the prevalence of Butler/Bladon signs and absence of Kinney/Bladon signs was as asserted by JB elsewhere in this thread):

    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff Baron View Post
    I counted more than 20 Bladon/Butler signs combos, and 1 Kinney/Bladon combo
    If I were Mr. Bustin I'd feel a little let down by it, and it seems that representing only 1 out of 21 sign combos, it would be a pretty ineffective trick.

    Possibility #3: the homeowner supporter Butler and Bladon - this would require the homeowner to have lied to Mr. Baron, and to have been dishonest in sign support, so I'm having trouble coming up with a plausible story for this one

    Possibility #4: the homeowner supported Butler and Bustin - but this seems pretty low probability and illogical as a more extreme example than Probability #3 given the signs indicating the opposite.

    I suppose there is a whole range of other possibilities that revolve around the spouses that live in the home supporting different candidates, or having posted signs only because they were coerced to or some other such explanation, but these don't marry with the fact that the homeowner explicitly told JB they were trying to "throw off SOS folks into believing this was the supported combo."

    --> My top bet: Probability #1 with a misunderstanding. The homeowner supported Kinney and Bladon, and then said something that Jeff B misheard or misunderstood that made it sound like the homeowner intended some sort of tricky maneuver.

  2. #17
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    275

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kim Reichelt View Post
    Jeff, I'm not insinuating anything. The circumstances you describe are hard to imagine. I am not saying you made it up. I am saying the sum total of the whole thing just doesn't make sense.

    Taken as a given: a home on JB's route to Claypit sported both a Bladon sign and a Kinney sign

    Possibility #1: the homeowner supported both Kinney and Bladon (as described in the signs) -- this is what would make the most intuitive sense, but then we'd need to understand why the homeowner seems to have lied or mislead Mr. Baron into thinking the signs were some kind of trick (or possibly there was just a miscommunication or misunderstanding between Mr. Baron and the homeowner)

    --> My top bet: Probability #1 with a misunderstanding. The homeowner supported Kinney and Bladon, and then said something that Jeff B misheard or misunderstood that made it sound like the homeowner intended some sort of tricky maneuver.
    I'm willing to believe this could be possible. I did not know the person myself, so a misunderstanding could be possible. Alternatively, it might have been a joke that I didn't quite catch.

    It remains possible that the intention was what was stated. I am aware of other cases in past elections where this type of activity was discussed (although I couldn't confirm if it was followed through on).

    Who knows, and frankly, it's over now.

  3. #18
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    3

    Default

    In response to Alan Reiss (sorry to use the wrong format!): Jeff D. I honestly was confused.. thats it - nothing more. I read what Jeff B said and if it profiles anybody it narrows down to perhaps 4,000 people. I've never spoke with Ms. Orlov before and I've never heard her name. Really. So whatever he said (above) did not lead this observer to any specific person. OK? So I'm still confused and with all due respect to Ms. Orlov.


    No, actually, it doesn't "narrow it down to perhaps 4,000 people". Most likely, in fact, it narrows it down to me. When I spoke with Shawn Kinney on the phone he made the specific comment that he was "surprised at just how few people had been calling him" and within that "few people" I suspect even fewer bothered to figure out how to call him during the day at his office, rather than at home.

    You may not have heard of me, but that doesn't seem to keep you from commenting upon something I (most likely) purportedly did, nor from (indirectly) supporting Jeff Baron's cynical accusations hurled at SOS which incorrectly use a nameless call as "proof" of SOS's ill-intent.

    So, let me set the record straight. If there was another person who called, asked one question, then hung up, I believe it is their right to do so - can only those with 2 or 3 questions call? But if the call was the call that I placed last week to Shawn at his office, as I suspect it was, then that call has been badly misrepresented for the purpose of smearing the reputation of a group of dedicated Wayland residents, which I resent.

    My call to Shawn Kinney is, in fact, an EXCELLENT example of EXACTLY what SHOULD happen in Wayland politics - polite interchange of ideas, backed up with facts by both parties, and a conversation that went on in-depth for quite a while (probably 30 minutes) about a wide range of topics, and respectfully so. Though I ended up disagreeing with his point of view on the high school vote - feeling that he had ignored some important facts about financing that had been publicly available (and which, after our call I verfied to make sure I wasn't the one who was mixed up on the facts), I nonetheless took the time, in person, to shake his hand on election day and thank him for his taking the time to return my call. This respectful interchange is a far cry from what it seems Jeff Baron is intent upon perpetuating. Please, please, please - Wayland needs people who are thoughtful, respectful, and who get their facts straight before making nasty accusations (SOS "put me up to it") or uninformed gross generalizations (4,000 people). As you and Jeff are some of the most vocal people in town, and therefore set the tone of town discussions to some degree, it would be great if you both could be more accurate and less (baselessly) accusatory in your prose and comments.

    And Jeff D - I'm pretty sure that the "one question" of the many I asked that is the sensitive one, is how Shawn had voted on the high school project. This was the question of greatest concern to me, particularly since - unlike all the other town candidates - Shawn had opted out of publicizing his views in the electronic newsletter format even though he was given more time to do so than the other candidates (given his energy for sending out post cards and posting signs I can only assume that this was a calculated move to "hide" some of his positions from voters.) He said he voted against the high school project, which puts him at odds with the majority of the community. We conversed for quite a while about his reasons and whether they were well-founded or not. But we also talked about technology in the schools, his interest in hiring high school interns, the presentation he made to the school board about administration to student ratios, my background, his background, his relationship with the current school board...you get the idea. It wasn't one question, and it certainly wasn't "hanging up."

    Time to move on. Please - everyone - let's work to bring Wayland political discussions back into the realm of the accurate and the respectful! We need to start working together as a community, even as we disagree, for the betterment of us all.
    Last edited by Melissa Orlov; 05-13-2010 at 11:06 AM. Reason: get original Reiss comment in this so people understand my comment

  4. #19
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    275

    Default

    This is an interesting story, Melissa, and well within your right to post your version of the events surrounding a call you made to a candidate. I have no interest in "naming names" and putting people's feet to the fire. As you know, this story may or may not be the one I was discussing. I used the example (without naming anyone, and still not doing so) as one in which I believe there is bad sportsmanship on both sides in politics. I also believe there's no crying about it. Similar calls were made by people I knew were SOS supporters to me when I ran. Not surprisingly, these same people were out there with signs for the opposition on election day. This is nothing new and I didn't get all bunched up about it then either.

    I recognize you see what you did differently, and that's OK. I read your version of events, given that you have been a vocal supporter of SOS and Yes4WHS, in a different way. But hey, that's what makes horseraces.

    As for your characterization of SOS as dedicated Wayland residents, I respectfully disagree.
    Last edited by Jeff Baron; 05-13-2010 at 11:40 AM. Reason: Trying not to be offensive...

  5. #20
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    3

    Default

    I appreciate what SOS has done to openly promote their opinions in Wayland and further the political conversation. When I first moved into Wayland I erroneously thought that the mysteriously named "Wayland Voter's Network" would provide unbiased info. That was until I started reading their materials. SOS makes no false claims to unbiased reporting. They say who they are, and follow up on it. That's a good, honest addition to the political commentary in Wayland. Being on their mailing list doesn't make me their stooge, though.

    I'm not so fond of your insinuations that I've somehow made up a "story" here, but will let it go. If we went to court and looked at Shawn's cell phone records, and my knowledge of stuff I wouldn't know unless Shawn had told me, my "story" (long conversation, many topics) would be borne out.

    As for your somehow "protecting" someone by not naming names - since the name I'm asking you to name is my own, it doesn't hold water. I can only conclude you refuse to do so because it would make you look bad (or make Shawn look bad).

    What does it take to be a "vocal supporter" of SOS and Yes4WHS? Voting for town services? Voting for the high school? Saying "thank you" to many citizens who put in hours to try to keep our schools going? If so, then I qualify. If it takes going to meetings, or somehow organizing events, I don't.

    You need to stop insulting people in town just becaue they don't agree with you. It hurts the way the town functions.

  6. #21
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    275

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Melissa Orlov View Post
    I appreciate what SOS has done to openly promote their opinions in Wayland and further the political conversation. When I first moved into Wayland I erroneously thought that the mysteriously named "Wayland Voter's Network" would provide unbiased info. That was until I started reading their materials. SOS makes no false claims to unbiased reporting. They say who they are, and follow up on it. That's a good, honest addition to the political commentary in Wayland. Being on their mailing list doesn't make me their stooge, though.

    I'm not so fond of your insinuations that I've somehow made up a "story" here, but will let it go. If we went to court and looked at Shawn's cell phone records, and my knowledge of stuff I wouldn't know unless Shawn had told me, my "story" (long conversation, many topics) would be borne out.

    As for your somehow "protecting" someone by not naming names - since the name I'm asking you to name is my own, it doesn't hold water. I can only conclude you refuse to do so because it would make you look bad (or make Shawn look bad).

    What does it take to be a "vocal supporter" of SOS and Yes4WHS? Voting for town services? Voting for the high school? Saying "thank you" to many citizens who put in hours to try to keep our schools going? If so, then I qualify. If it takes going to meetings, or somehow organizing events, I don't.

    You need to stop insulting people in town just becaue they don't agree with you. It hurts the way the town functions.
    I find this whole interchange curious, in that you would log on here to accost me for insulting you when I have never mentioned your name. I can only conclude you must feel bad for doing whatever you did, cause I can't see any other reason for implicating yourself here and I do not intend to name anyone's name. As I said befoe, this has happened in other elecions when I was a candidate as well. Also, I apologize if you feel I'm saying you made up your story. I could the same thing about your view of my statement.

    As for SOS not making false claims, let me just use one example. I'll take their missive to their supporters today. They say that TM eliminated multiple items in the capital budget, despite passage of the debt exclusion at the polls. This is a misleading statement. Anyone who was at Town Meeting knows that Peter Gossels (the Moderator) said the passage of the question at the polls is for the explicit purpose of giveing permission for TM to vote upon and pass/not pass the debt exclusion. The vote at the polls is not, in and of itself, a passage of the capital budget.

  7. #22
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Wayland MA 463 Old Conn Path
    Posts
    382

    Default Why why why why .....

    Quote Originally Posted by Melissa Orlov View Post
    No, actually, it doesn't "narrow it down to perhaps 4,000 people". Most likely, in fact, it narrows it down to me. When I spoke with Shawn Kinney on the phone he made the specific comment that he was "surprised at just how few people had been calling him" and within that "few people" I suspect even fewer bothered to figure out how to call him during the day at his office, rather than at home.
    Melissa, so what you have assumed is that Shawn Kinney tells me who calls him and who calls him at his office.
    I assure you that he doesn't do that.

    So when you came in to deny something that Jeff Baron wasn't accusing you of, I found it curious and asked the obvious question.

    When I re-read Jeff Baron's post thats when I concluded that he narrowed it down to about 4,000 people which was my way of saying that I never heard your name, don't know you and never knew of this phone call and was curious as to why you were denying something that you were'nt accused of.


    Quote Originally Posted by Melissa Orlov View Post
    My call to Shawn Kinney is, in fact, an EXCELLENT example of EXACTLY what SHOULD happen in Wayland politics - polite interchange of ideas, backed up with facts by both parties, and a conversation that went on in-depth for quite a while (probably 30 minutes) about a wide range of topics, and respectfully so.
    We are certainly are in agreement here.
    I might have tried the candidates email first and arranged a phone meeting but thats just me.

    Quote Originally Posted by Melissa Orlov View Post
    Please, please, please - Wayland needs people who are thoughtful, respectful, and who get their facts straight before making nasty accusations (SOS "put me up to it") or uninformed gross generalizations (4,000 people).
    I just explained to you that my number choice of 4,000 isn't so gross based on the data that I had in front of me.
    Again, you weren't named ... and you chimed in to deny. This observer saw that. Does that make sense to you?

    Quote Originally Posted by Melissa Orlov View Post
    As you and Jeff are some of the most vocal people in town, and therefore set the tone of town discussions to some degree, it would be great if you both could be more accurate and less (baselessly) accusatory in your prose and comments.
    Now this is the place where I have to get just a little upset.
    The *you* in your sentence above is actually *me*... right?

    I am vocal... true and I intentionally try to set the tone when I can intelligently contribute to the conversation... true.
    But now you are accusing me of being 'innacurate' and 'basslessly accusatory' ??

    One more time Melissa...
    Step 1: I read Baron's post
    Step 2: I saw your post denying something that Baron did not accuse you of or name you in.
    Setp 3: I asked a logical and innocent question as to why a person would come here and deny something that they were not accused of.

    Then I saw a 'three stooges' whipped cream pie heading right for my head.

    In other words, why did you need to attack me now for being in-accurate and basselessly accusatory.... my feelings are hurt.
    And I don't deserve the label that you have just announced to the world... at least the enews world.
    I would consider a retraction a great favor at this time.

    Quote Originally Posted by Melissa Orlov View Post
    Time to move on. Please - everyone - let's work to bring Wayland political discussions back into the realm of the accurate and the respectful! We need to start working together as a community, even as we disagree, for the betterment of us all.
    Well Melissa it is time to move on. But perhaps you might consider coming back and correcting the record with respect to what you just said about me.

    Yes, lets work as a community and I've done my share of Wayland contribution and public service.
    Unfortunately politics is a disease of which there is no cure.

    Its more likely that you can find me on town meeting floor than I can find you... but I hope to meet you someday so that we can respectfully agree or disagree and be neighbors in Wayland.

    So as I said before, I will say again... with all due respect to Ms. Orlov.

  8. #23
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    726

    Default

    This whole thread concerns me. It may not be what has happened here, but as it stands, anyone can come on here and provide unsubstantiated examples to generate negative feelings about any group of people they want. This is something I'm sure no one would condone. Would anyone like to offer any suggestions for adjustments to posting guidelines that address this issue?

  9. #24
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Wayland MA 463 Old Conn Path
    Posts
    382

    Default Still waiting....

    Quote Originally Posted by Kim Reichelt View Post
    This whole thread concerns me. It may not be what has happened here, but as it stands, anyone can come on here and provide unsubstantiated examples to generate negative feelings about any group of people they want. This is something I'm sure no one would condone. Would anyone like to offer any suggestions for adjustments to posting guidelines that address this issue?
    Well Kim, this thread concerns me too.
    I came here to ask an innocent question, a question that was logical based on what I read.
    In the process I was thrown under that bus... asked for a retraction and have not received one to date.

    I also believe that my tone, tenor and language to Ms. Orlov has been civil and polite.

    I have no suggestions on this thread other than a DF will allow the creation of any topic that the thread starter wants to start.
    And anybody can come in and make unsubstantiated characterizations of anybody they want.

    Its a difficult job to moderate (as I noted in another thread)... I guess your BoD might ponder this issue.

    And at the same time... I would hope that I would receive that retraction from Ms. Orlov about how I have been characterized.

    Respectfully,

    Alan J. Reiss

  10. #25
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    275

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kim Reichelt View Post
    This whole thread concerns me. It may not be what has happened here, but as it stands, anyone can come on here and provide unsubstantiated examples to generate negative feelings about any group of people they want. This is something I'm sure no one would condone. Would anyone like to offer any suggestions for adjustments to posting guidelines that address this issue?
    Kim....I would say that the only thing that happened here was that I gave an example of something that happened in this election, carefully not naming names. Ms. Orlov took this personally, assumed I was talking about her, and went on a rampage. Alan questioned why she implicated herself, and she also had a problem with that act. While there have most certainly been forums where things have gotten nasty, I would say this is on the low end.

    That being said, and addressing your issue in a larger sense, you pose a question that is likely the problem of all blogs/DFs/online forums, etc. It is less of a problem here due to the lack of anonymity, though. Unless you are prepared to create a requirement that names/dates/places be used, I don't know how you resolve the he said/she said aspect of situations where two people discuss different angles of a single story.

  11. #26
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Wayland MA 463 Old Conn Path
    Posts
    382

    Default Insulting people and hurting the way the town functions...

    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff Baron View Post
    Alan questioned why she implicated herself, and she also had a problem with that act.
    Quote Originally Posted by Melissa Orlov View Post
    You need to stop insulting people in town just becaue they don't agree with you. It hurts the way the town functions.
    Jeff, I asked Melissa for a retraction of the insult she aimed at me and she is silent about this. At this point I hope she offers that retraction but I don't expect it. If she did, I would thank her and move on as she wanted us to.

    This situation reminds me of a famous quote from Mahatma Gandhi with respect to this unwarranted insult and lack of retraction...

    "You must be the change you wish to see in the world. "

  12. #27
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    275

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AlanJReiss View Post
    Jeff, I asked Melissa for a retraction of the insult she aimed at me and she is silent about this. At this point I hope she offers that retraction but I don't expect it. If she did, I would thank her and move on as she wanted us to.
    I have every intention of moving on, Alan, with or without her retraction. This is a non-issue, in my opinion.

  13. #28
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Wayland MA 463 Old Conn Path
    Posts
    382

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff Baron View Post
    I have every intention of moving on, Alan, with or without her retraction. This is a non-issue, in my opinion.
    Ya, your right, whipped cream pie in the face ain't so bad after all.

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •