The Observation Deck

Dan Alaimo wrote:I wish Councilman Anderson had stuck around. He was helping me make sense of City Hall's views.

Michael Deneen wrote:

Dan Alaimo wrote:I wish Councilman Anderson had stuck around. He was helping me make sense of City Hall's views.

He did his job...he came here to deliver the "Team Summers" talking points.
Just as with the rest of "Team Summers", he decided he wants no part of follow up questions.
To be fair, that is typical of politicians at all levels.

Patrick Wadden wrote:

Brian Essi wrote:

Tim Liston wrote:I chuckle at the notion of "free speech" on the Deck. My understanding is that (1) the Observation Deck is privately-owned, and (2) you have no "rights" here that are not espressly granted to you by the owner. That also means there are no "rules" per se because they can be changed for any reason or for no reason at all. And if you don't like it you don't have to participate. Personally I think JOB has gone way too far in his accommodation of certain individuals who post here. Farther than I would probably have gone if I owned this forum. Kate was gratuitously obscene, and Corey just polluted the place, eating up column inches for no purpose other than to destroy threads.

Mr. Liston, you are spot on. If I owned the Deck, Mr./Ms. Rossen would have been gone a long time ago. Mr./Ms. Rossen was comparable to a patron coming to a restaurant, burping, farting and making a scene--and never buying anything--and telling everyone in the place the food had bugs in it. Any restaurant owner would throw the jerk out the first time he did it and call the Police if he tried to come back. What proof is there he/she has been banned?

Is Corey still banned until the 7th? Can he be let back in early? You know, for good behavior or timed served? Is there a probation period once a person has been welcomed back to the deck after a ban?

cmager wrote:

Patrick Wadden wrote:

Brian Essi wrote:

Tim Liston wrote:I chuckle at the notion of "free speech" on the Deck. My understanding is that (1) the Observation Deck is privately-owned, and (2) you have no "rights" here that are not espressly granted to you by the owner. That also means there are no "rules" per se because they can be changed for any reason or for no reason at all. And if you don't like it you don't have to participate. Personally I think JOB has gone way too far in his accommodation of certain individuals who post here. Farther than I would probably have gone if I owned this forum. Kate was gratuitously obscene, and Corey just polluted the place, eating up column inches for no purpose other than to destroy threads.

Mr. Liston, you are spot on. If I owned the Deck, Mr./Ms. Rossen would have been gone a long time ago. Mr./Ms. Rossen was comparable to a patron coming to a restaurant, burping, farting and making a scene--and never buying anything--and telling everyone in the place the food had bugs in it. Any restaurant owner would throw the jerk out the first time he did it and call the Police if he tried to come back. What proof is there he/she has been banned?

Is Corey still banned until the 7th? Can he be let back in early? You know, for good behavior or timed served? Is there a probation period once a person has been welcomed back to the deck after a ban?

Mr. Wadden, other than holding the same Prop 64 opinion as Mr. Rossen, what is your fascination with Rossen's alleged ban and his participation on The Deck? I agree with Mr. Liston and Mr. Essi as to Rossen's contributions or lack thereof, and the harm that he brings to the digital town square. In Rossen's absence, adults have been dialoguing in content-rich, focused threads. Why do you so value what appears to be The Deck's digital nuisance?

Patrick Wadden wrote:

cmager wrote:

Patrick Wadden wrote:

Brian Essi wrote:

Tim Liston wrote:I chuckle at the notion of "free speech" on the Deck. My understanding is that (1) the Observation Deck is privately-owned, and (2) you have no "rights" here that are not espressly granted to you by the owner. That also means there are no "rules" per se because they can be changed for any reason or for no reason at all. And if you don't like it you don't have to participate. Personally I think JOB has gone way too far in his accommodation of certain individuals who post here. Farther than I would probably have gone if I owned this forum. Kate was gratuitously obscene, and Corey just polluted the place, eating up column inches for no purpose other than to destroy threads.

Mr. Liston, you are spot on. If I owned the Deck, Mr./Ms. Rossen would have been gone a long time ago. Mr./Ms. Rossen was comparable to a patron coming to a restaurant, burping, farting and making a scene--and never buying anything--and telling everyone in the place the food had bugs in it. Any restaurant owner would throw the jerk out the first time he did it and call the Police if he tried to come back. What proof is there he/she has been banned?

Is Corey still banned until the 7th? Can he be let back in early? You know, for good behavior or timed served? Is there a probation period once a person has been welcomed back to the deck after a ban?

Mr. Wadden, other than holding the same Prop 64 opinion as Mr. Rossen, what is your fascination with Rossen's alleged ban and his participation on The Deck? I agree with Mr. Liston and Mr. Essi as to Rossen's contributions or lack thereof, and the harm that he brings to the digital town square. In Rossen's absence, adults have been dialoguing in content-rich, focused threads. Why do you so value what appears to be The Deck's digital nuisance?

"alleged ban"...LOl. He was banned. It's a fact. I don't know Corey. Full disclosure: my wife coached his daughter for the Lakewood Catholic Academy volleyball team 2 years ago but I never met Corey during that time.

m buckley wrote:

Patrick Wadden wrote:

cmager wrote:

Patrick Wadden wrote:

Brian Essi wrote:

Tim Liston wrote:I chuckle at the notion of "free speech" on the Deck. My understanding is that (1) the Observation Deck is privately-owned, and (2) you have no "rights" here that are not espressly granted to you by the owner. That also means there are no "rules" per se because they can be changed for any reason or for no reason at all. And if you don't like it you don't have to participate. Personally I think JOB has gone way too far in his accommodation of certain individuals who post here. Farther than I would probably have gone if I owned this forum. Kate was gratuitously obscene, and Corey just polluted the place, eating up column inches for no purpose other than to destroy threads.

Mr. Liston, you are spot on. If I owned the Deck, Mr./Ms. Rossen would have been gone a long time ago. Mr./Ms. Rossen was comparable to a patron coming to a restaurant, burping, farting and making a scene--and never buying anything--and telling everyone in the place the food had bugs in it. Any restaurant owner would throw the jerk out the first time he did it and call the Police if he tried to come back. What proof is there he/she has been banned?

Is Corey still banned until the 7th? Can he be let back in early? You know, for good behavior or timed served? Is there a probation period once a person has been welcomed back to the deck after a ban?

Mr. Wadden, other than holding the same Prop 64 opinion as Mr. Rossen, what is your fascination with Rossen's alleged ban and his participation on The Deck? I agree with Mr. Liston and Mr. Essi as to Rossen's contributions or lack thereof, and the harm that he brings to the digital town square. In Rossen's absence, adults have been dialoguing in content-rich, focused threads. Why do you so value what appears to be The Deck's digital nuisance?

"alleged ban"...LOl. He was banned. It's a fact. I don't know Corey. Full disclosure: my wife coached his daughter for the Lakewood Catholic Academy volleyball team 2 years ago but I never met Corey during that time.

Wadden this is priceless. You pining over the loss of Mr. Rossen's obstructionist crap. Lamenting the lack of support for Build Lakewood's stratagem of get off message and get off ad nauseam
What's next, an appeal to bring back Ms. Parker's mother f..ker this, go f..k yourself that.