What twaddle...

Dear Dolores and Jessica,

Let's hope the remainder of the prominant pseudonyms add commentary with content or contribution in illustration of the validity of needed changes that would legitimize a town square forum. With each such commentary, your majority of readers will have confirmed that forum will not exist until such rational editorial controls are immediate and specific.

There is an exceptional difference between free speech and random disrespect.

Challenged?

halbailey@yahoo.com

Hal: Although I will absolutely defend your right to free speech, I am getting really tired of your never ending posts about, quite frankly, nothing...Some people actually do not feel the need to blog every single thought that comes into their mind...Please, think about it, get some hobbies, take a walk, do some volunteer work, and do not feel obligated to post your every thought...Good luck!

Dear Dolores and Jessica,

We now have another contribution that illustrates the lack of content or value in commentary that justifies a forum. Neighborhoods are building their position that EMCEB's sponsored pseudonyms are simply devoid of contributions that meet your specification for information and opinion.

Let's thank those that contribute to such definition of the lack of forum.

halbailey@yahoo.com

LWF

Dear Dolores and Jessica,

Pseudonyms have yet to challenge the definition of Forum specified by a majority of your readers via their media audit teams. The only commentary is disrespect for my reporting of the majority's definition. Let's once again challenge commentators to provide specifics for free speech in this social media in contrast to the disrespect without content that is typical.

halbailey@yahoo.com

Pseudonyms?

Hal, everyone here has a name. Pseudonyms can also be defined as the following:
"In some cases, pseudonyms are adopted because they are part of a cultural or organizational tradition." Example: American. Rick is a name. John is my name. Be a man and address each person who posts here and stop replying to "Dolores" and "Jessica."

You write "There is an exceptional difference between free speech and random disrespect." For each comment, you reply in jiberish and don't address the individual who is trying to give a different opinion. In short, your comments and self rightious, misguided behavior are nothing but disrespecful towards others.

You'd have been a superb leader in Germany in the 1930's and early 1940's for sure. Sorry Hal, wrong time and wrong side of history.

Dear Dolores and Jessica,

You now have another example of commentary that does not address the definition of a forum and defames the presentation of the subject and its author. But a specific point needs repeating in explanation, this exchange is between readers and editors with the intent of creating further, in-depth coverage of the subject. Discussions among commentators simply breed the disrespect and lack of content or context that is delivered in volume in Express Forum exchanges.

halbailey@yahoo.com

Don't read what you are not interested in -- MYOB.

Dear Dolores and Jessica,

Once again, The subject of Forum as defined by the majority of your readers is not addressed by a pseudonym and serves as a good example of subject drift or shift to avoid context to the exchange. The purpose for the majority of your readers is to have a Forum that allows readers to share information and opinion with editors in a respectful exchange and promote further coverage of subjects important to communities and neighborhoods within your readership area.

It is the business of your readers to mind how EMCEB does business and to monitor any disrespectful or untruthful presentation that defames such interests.

halbailey@yahoo.com

Basic Civics teaches that "free speech" discussions are meaningless, unless it's the government that's imposing a restriction. If you believe there's such a thing as "free speech" between private citizens, try telling your boss what you Really think of him. ;-)

A forum is more like a cocktail party, hosted by Jessica and her crew. They get to set the parameters of behavior, and they're free to give the heave-ho to anybody whose behavior does not conform.

I think that what Hal and his imaginary friends are hoping-for is greater definition of those parameters of appropriate conduct hereabouts. Here's a personal/pseudonymical vote for breadth -- but I would also welcome policy guidance. As a former moderator for the little internet news/humor jewel fark.com, I do think it's good to have rules, and to enforce them uniformly, thoughtfully and with restraint.

My two cents.

Dear Dolores and Jessica,

Let's, without imagination, celebrate all the contribution to this exchange. It takes little imagination to know that Express readers, for the most part, are embarrassed by the current town square forum and have provided that response in e-mails and even selected postings by neighborhood reps.

Jessica, you now have the results forwarded to you from resident counsel's definition acquired from EMC Palo Alto. You also have the summary of distribution that was sent to neighborhoods in your readership area by resident counsel. What EMC imagines is a open environment for comment without concern for disrespect or truthful commentary about others. Which makes Cardinal's "cocktail party" a rational definition for the lack of content, context and communication that comes together in antithesis of a forum.

With points illustrated, thank you to everyone.

Harald A. Bailey
Member, CDSI Research Fellowship
halbailey@yahoo.com

LWF

Hal: How about a New Years Resolution from you, to only blog once a week on this forum? I know it will be tough for you initially, but after a while you will realize there is a whole world out there, and real people to communicate with in person. Good luck.

American,
People like "Hal" dont't dare speak person to person about issues.

1.) He doesn't have the intestinal fortitude,
2.) He'd be challenged and humbled with an educated debate,
3.) and he'd realize the "pseudonyms" are actually living, breathing individuals who wouldn't take his gibberish for one second.

He's the kid who hit you and ran down the street as fast as he could before you could retaliate. As much depth as a pane glass window.

I wrote about Hal months ago and ultimately felt I was being mean to our well meaning town "Gabby Hayes" persona from the westerns of yore. I just ignore his posts and exitencial questions. It's cool, just ignore them, imaginary friends are harmless and perhaps helpful in the end. There are no "corridor constituents" that email him daily on issues seeking his crucial involvement and his ramblings are not relevent or cogent for the most part. Live and let live...