The Observation Deck

I received a letter today by a "civic leader" in it they complained of the negativity and cynicism on the Observation Deck.

Then There was this!

Finally - I think there is an issue of transparency that you need to address:
Recently Betsey and Linda have been seen
lurking about and one would hope getting ready to join the discussion.
I think those that view the Deck need to know that you are monitoring their activity through IP addresses. Just as the general public is not familiar with the cyber-neutral term "lurking"......I would guess that most people checking out the Observation Deck activity do not know that every look/see can be - and often is - monitored by others.

THIS IS AN OUTRIGHT LIE!

WE DO NOT KEEP, OR RECORD, IP ADDRESSES.

That is not even possible with the software we are using.
There is no one monitoring users and ip addresses.

What All Registered Members Can Do!
At the bottom of the front page, when you sign in ANYONE can see the names of people signed in on the Deck. ANYONE, BY NAME, NOT IP ADDRESS. TRY IT, PEOPLE CAN BE HIDDEN IF THEY WANT.
All registered members can see it.

At the top of each section is a list of people in that section, you can see it after you sign in. All registered members can see it.

So stop that lie right now!

I like to practice what I preach. So instead of keeping this outright lie and misrepresentation in a little game of email secrets, telephone, coffee clatched closet I wanted to get it out here.

In another Observer paper, we are working with sociologists studying the positive effects on a community of the many volunteer social groups Observers can start and grow. Not here in Lakewood.

No study

No monitoring

No emails lists or personal information shared with anyone EVER!


.


.

Jim O'Bryan wrote:I would guess that most people checking out the Observation Deck activity do not know that every look/see can be - and often is - monitored by others.

THIS IS AN OUTRIGHT LIE!

WE DO NOT KEEP, OR RECORD, IP ADDRESSES.

[/quote]

There is also no way for anyone to read or monitor PMs, or email sent from the Observer. We can not even access your passwords, we can only issue new passwords, and ask that you change them immediately upon receiving them. We take your privacy very seriously. Unlike other Lakewood groups, we do not share or sell our email lists.

The Lakewood Observer was designed to give EVERYONE an equal seat at the community table of discussion. To get rid of the star chamber mentality that a only a select FEW, can be trusted.

Because of the cynicism and negativity in Lakewood, the only way we could see to address this problem was to put it all out there. Give the residents as much information as possible, and then they can make decisions on how it applies to their lives.

There is, and never has been any attempt to control or shut down any discussion.


.

Jim -

As with people in the general population, some people in City Hall may perceive a threat when there is nothing there.

As I told someone directly on the Deck, if you can't take criticism, don't say or do anything in a public venue.

People may be upset because they want to see what is being said and they don't want anyone to know that they are doing it. There's a name for this type of behaviour - PARANOIA.

The bottom of the Observation Deck Main Page.
This would indicate 1 registered User Non-Hidden
2 registered users hidden
6 Guests or non-signed in or registered readers

The working Deck Administrator, can see the name of anyone
registered online.



.

sharon kinsella wrote:Jim -

As with people in the general population, some people in City Hall may perceive a threat when there is nothing there.

As I told someone directly on the Deck, if you can't take criticism, don't say or do anything in a public venue.

People may be upset because they want to see what is being said and they don't want anyone to know that they are doing it. There's a name for this type of behaviour - PARANOIA.

Sharon

I want it clear, this administration, Mayor Edward FitzGerald, and all of City Hall has been very supportive of the Lakewood Observer Project. I am willing to say that they have been far more open than the last administration, which also supported the project.

It is not merely paranoia.

It is also an effort to marginalize the effort of every Observer.

One would ask why?

.

It's mind-boggling to see the lengths people will go to in an attempt to destroy one of the best things to happen to Lakewood.

Jealousy breeds contempt, no?

I'm a little confused. Did the quote Mr. O'Bryan cited in his original post appear on the Observation Deck somewhere? Or was it from a personal email or letter sent to him?

Jim I thought you were indicating it was a politician.

I did not mean to slam the administration. If I was doing something like that I would name names or departments. As you know, I'm not shy about it.

I did not slam anyone, I said they were being paranoid, which to me is needless worry.

Don't make me into a bad guy, I'm perfectly capable of doing that on my own.

Jill Jusko wrote:I'm a little confused. Did the quote Mr. O'Bryan cited in his original post appear on the Observation Deck somewhere? Or was it from a personal email or letter sent to him?

Jill

This was sent to me as part of a personal letter to me about the cynicism and negativity on the Deck.

The paragraphed I pulled called for me to set it straight, and own up to transparency issues.

I thought it would be best, to address them publicly, as I am sure the rumor came from somewhere.

Sharon

I just wanted to make sure, everyone was aware that this administration and city hall, are turning on the lights, and being much more open then any group before them that I ever dealt with. Which is not to say Tom George was not open with us, but that Mayor Edward FitzGerald and team, are extremely open and helpful when asked.

.

Jim O'Bryan wrote: The paragraphed I pulled called for me to set it straight, and own up to transparency issues.

Whomever wrote that needs a lesson on how messageboards work, specifically phpBB...

David, that's what I thought.

Some people are just clueless, though.

First of all, the word "lurking" is in general use and I'd venture that most people under 40 know exactly what it means both online and in the real world.

As for this board, I saw one of my neighbors' name on the bottom of the Forum Index frequently so I mentioned it to him and he was surprised I knew he was reading the board. I asked him if he knew how to make himself "hidden" and he didn't know so I told him and now he reads in hidden mode.

What is the big deal here?

Grace O'Malley wrote: What is the big deal here?

No big deal. Mountains outta molehills...

David Lay wrote:Whomever wrote that needs a lesson on how messageboards work, specifically phpBB...

Part of the discussion was, and will always be, perception. However when it comes to the Observer Transparency is a rule.

Jim Devito who now runs the Observation Deck was found, starting a similar project. I asked if he would rather taking over the Observation Deck. When asked what we needed, the answer was for him to run it. Nothing else was said, he had no connection to any Observer before this started. He found out first hand, the only agenda is openness and accountability.

Recently Heidi Hility, Paula Reed, and myself were discussing a new board for the Observer. A never ending process. Paula asked what are the rules? Our answer was, "You tell us." "Who are you looking at to join the board?" our answer was, "Here is a list of those interested, you talk with them." Sadly Paula Reed is so busy with many positive civic projects, she cannot head the board.

Then Lakewood Planning Director stopped in, and said, "Can I join the table." We mentioned we were working on a new board of directors for the paper, and that we would love him to join us and ask for any suggestions. Ten minutes later Mary Anne Crampton director of MainStreet walked in and asked what we were discussing. We told her, and asked her to join the discussion with ideas and suggestions.



This is how dedicated to tranparency the Lakewood Observer is.

Everyone on the board believes it is a community media project.


.

Mr. O'Bryan,

It seems to me that by not including the name of the person who sent you that letter, you are doing the very thing that you frequently call out others for: citing "unnamed" sources.

That aside, because I don't really care who sent it, the letter was sent to you personally. As such, it certainly was not a public accusation or effort to try to sway the other readers of the Deck. They weren't even aware of it. You brought it to the light of day.

And that said, couldn't you simply have used it as a learning tool to explain things without the outrage? Given your initial comments about the "lurking," a misunderstanding seems not out the realm of possibility. Not everyone is so versed on the ins and outs of this tool as you are.

You yourself have posted incorrect information before and then corrected yourself in later posts. Does that mean your initial incorrect info was a lie?

Jill Jusko wrote:Mr. O'Bryan,

It seems to me that by not including the name of the person who sent you that letter, you are doing the very thing that you frequently call out others for: citing "unnamed" sources.

That aside, because I don't really care who sent it, the letter was sent to you personally. As such, it certainly was not a public accusation or effort to try to sway the other readers of the Deck. They weren't even aware of it. You brought it to the light of day.

And that said, couldn't you simply have used it as a learning tool to explain things without the outrage? Given your initial comments about the "lurking," a misunderstanding seems not out the realm of possibility. Not everyone is so versed on the ins and outs of this tool as you are.

You yourself have posted incorrect information before and then corrected yourself in later posts. Does that mean your initial incorrect info was a lie?

Jill

All very valid points, you certainly have a much cooler head then I. Perhaps, if we were in each others position you might understand my sensitivity. I could have sent a note, and will later that addresses the letter on the whole. However it was my belief then, and now, that this is a rumor that should be addressed.

The letter actually calls me to addresses the Observers on this issue. We listen, and I act and even overreact.

Everyone can make a mistake, anyone can be wrong, but when it truly affects the process of many. It would seem that an open answer would be the best way to address it.

Who wrote the letter matters to no one but me. Nor should it. I do respect the privacy of personal emails. This is why I left the name and all of the letter but this statement in the realm of private information.

As always thank you for your valid response and participation.


.