urbanMSP

Paul Ryan AND John Edwards?

Paul Ryan AND John Edwards?

Right?

When someone from your neighborhood org emails you personally begging you to show up to your neighborhood's (Corcoran) Land Use & Transportation committee, you basically have to, right? I think I remember reading that in the agreement I accepted when I registered here.

The WEDGE pervs are back:
http://www.wedgelive.com/2015/10/take-d ... about.html

Disgusting.

That is utterly despicable. As someone who can be pretty abrasive and kind of an asshole I find nothing 'snarky' about that at all. It's straight up intimidation and threats and it has no place in civil discourse or politics (local or otherwise).

Very true.

Snarkiness has no place in civil discourse either.

I'm fairly certain people say snark when they don't like it and satire when they do, but it's effective even if someone doesn't like it.

I don't think there's any problem with snark (or satire) in political discourse in general... but I'm not certain how I feel about elected officials being snarky about their constituents.

Fairly certain that the way neighborhood groups are organized as non-profit groups, it's rather a stretch to consider NO officers "elected officials" and their neighbors "their constituents."
- Elected official who is snarky about his constituents.

That really just speaks to the weirdness of the neighborhood organization model, thanks to the legacy of the NRP. They're private organizations, but they're also supposed to be representative of their neighborhoods and they manage(d) not-insignificant amounts of taxpayer money. At the very least, they're quangos.

Well, it depends on what your goal is. If your goal is to work with people to accomplish something or try to have a conversation to help someone understand your position, snarkiness is counter-productive.

If your goal is to just piss people off and perhaps make yourself feel good, that's something else.

You must be a hoot at parties, David.

Also I like the cute assumption that the people John snarks at want to work together to accomplish something.

Also I like the cute assumption that the people John snarks at want to work together to accomplish something.

I made no such assumption. I spoke in general terms. If someone's not listening, one can point that out without snark. Other people are more likely to take one seriously when one acts like an adult.

But if one wants to keep alienating others, go right ahead, I guess.

I'm fairly certain people say snark when they don't like it and satire when they do, but it's effective even if someone doesn't like it.

Effective in what way? It depends on the goal of the one creating the snark. That's all I'm saying.

Stephen Colbert has used satire effectively, I would argue. As have many writers in the past: Twain, Swift, Chaucer, etc.

Taylor Swift and Chingy?

I feel there is a time and place for snark and I don't think the neighborhood meetings are the appropriate place. This person was elected and I feel is doing a disservice to those that voted for him by reinforcing the divide between 'urbanists' and 'nimbys'.

FRNNG had our annual meeting and elections last night. I'm very pleased with how our board is shaping up. Congrats to occasional forumer @martykoessel who showed up, nominated himself, and won the Community & Safety chairperson seat.