It was my day to edit, so my after-the-fact changes weren't totally out of line.mattaudio wrote:Abuse of the streetsmn editorial process!!!
All in all, the article was really solid (obviously...just look at those awesome maps). I think the reason for lack of comments may be that the article really wasn't controversial and didn't present any questions or challenges. It presented fact (Minneapolis has lost political clout at the state and in Hennepin County) and stated that brisk population growth will hopefully reverse that trend. Even for the few anti-development trolls that streets.mn has attracted to some comment sections, your post wasn't discussing any specific development, so they had nothing to complain about. Even the most ardent trolls favor "generic" population growth for the city (until it comes to their backyard), just look at the overall tone and results of the last city election. Nobody was running on a "no more development" platform...not even Meg Tuthill. She just didn't want any more in Lowry Hill East. Betsy Hodges was openly touting 500,000 people as a campaign plank.
In short, the article was so solid and to the point, there wasn't any room to poke holes or suggest a different viewpoint.