PW Parcel Tax Limitation Policy: Results to Date
Original post made by frank on Apr 5, 2009
One web page worth of posts at this particular time consisted of 26 subjects, of which the astounding number of 11 posts (nearly 44%) were parcel tax subjects that subsequently became limited to registered users. In the 11 posts there were 67 comments total. This averages very closely to 6 comments per posted subject. This number is incredibly low given the subject is "hot" in Pleasanton. Can one assume that the policy is essentially throttling down discussion on any one subject within the broader issue of the parcel tax?
The fact that posters are starting an unusual number of new subjects is a direct result of the policy, which tends to shut down discussion on the former subjects, as evidenced by the very low number of comments. I did not enumerate it, but it struck me that most of the new threads are initiated by NO PARCEL TAX advocates who have bothered to register. These advocates of NO tend to be the same vocal ones. In each thread a few YES PARCEL TAX supporters weigh in, again those who have bothered to register. It appeared to me that none of the newly initiated subjects were initiated by YES PARCEL TAX supporters. Furthermore, the vast number of us unregistered readers are SHUT OUT!
So, it seems the PW is waging a war against mostly those who are against the parcel tax, and implicitly saying they are uncivil.
The PW has two more months to go with this policy, and it will only get worse for them, not better. They can't win on this. Either everyone registers, or no one does!
on Apr 5, 2009 at 6:16 pm
I for one am glad to see that the Pleasanton Weekly is finally starting to establish standards and expectations with their blogs. For far too long this thing has just been a faceless, factless, careless free-for-all. PW - you must stand for something or you stand alone. Keep monitoring and holding posters accountable.
on Apr 5, 2009 at 6:23 pm
Therefore, Standards will now rush to register so he/she is not accused of being a hypocrite after writing "its" post as an anonymous entity. After all, "it", Standards that is, is standing for something.
on Apr 5, 2009 at 6:28 pm
Thank you Frank - it only took you seven minutes to prove my point. I will, however, unlike you, refrain from name calling. If restricted, I have no objection.