BOE Election - Vote November 2, 2021
sprout said:
Are the two of you 'liking' the critique, and/or 'liking' the misgendering?
The same comment I quoted in my response to you.
michaelgoldberg said:
I love how people who can’t defend the actual issue of secrecy and lack of transparency try to change the subject with a distraction of silly semantic games. Nice try!
Transparency is important. In this case, any argument for it that doesn’t understand and account for Cuttle’s reasons for guarding their privacy is only half-baked.
sprout said: Are the two of you 'liking' the critique, and/or 'liking' the misgendering?
Mom270 said: The same comment I quoted in my response to you.
Since you did know when you 'liked' the post that it included misgendering (even if unintentional), it was a question requesting your honest answer.
Purposeful misgendering is a form a disrespect. I wasn't sure if you were aware of that, and might have thought it was funny to see this type of mistake made in reference to someone you appear to hold in disdain.
sprout said:
Since you did know when you 'liked' the post that it included misgendering (even if unintentional), it was a question requesting your honest answer.
Purposeful misgendering is a form a disrespect. I wasn't sure if you were aware of that, and might have thought it was funny to see this type of mistake made in reference to someone you appear to hold in disdain.
The most important thing to me is not that they are non-binary and that is not a reason for me to vote for or against any candidate. The most important thing is that they were not an effective BOE member and that poster was absolutely right about their overuse of jargon. I “liked” and agree with them on that point, although their use of the pronoun was incorrect. With regard to disrespect, if my child were the one murdered on school property following lax security measures that a court will likely someday find to be gross negligence by SOMSD, I would have gone ballistic when they continued to call themself Shannon “SafeSchools” Cuttle after that happened. How insensitive. But keep your focus on the pronouns because that is what matters most to you.
It seemed like a teachable moment, but your disdain is wanting to be the biggest thing in the room.
FWIW: I didn't vote for Cuttle either. But I respect their service.
sprout said:
It seemed like a teachable moment, but your disdain is wanting to be the biggest thing in the room.
FWIW: I didn't vote for Cuttle either. But I respect their service.
More snark, awesome. I always used the pronouns correctly in all of my posts but you are just interested in being snotty. Nice how you don’t address substance, just like Cuttle
For reference, this is snark:
Your posts seem very respectful, friendly, and intellectually curious.
sprout said:
For reference, this is snark:
Your posts seem very respectful, friendly, and intellectually curious.
And your posts are sanctimonious and obnoxious.
That's how you read them, but not how they are intended. Except that last one.
sprout said:
That's how you read them, but not how they are intended. Except that last one.
I read them that way because they are that way.
sprout said:
No. But you can believe that if you want to.
Again, sanctimonious and obnoxious.
For reference, this is sanctimonious:
If I agreed with a critique of someone, but the critique even obliquely referenced a stereotype or a derogatory term, I would not even consider hitting the 'like' button.
Is that the sanctimoniousness you read into my initial question, that is getting you all defensive?
Mom270 said:
... With regard to disrespect, if my child were the one murdered on school property following lax security measures that a court will likely someday find to be gross negligence by SOMSD, I would have gone ballistic when they continued to call themself Shannon “SafeSchools” Cuttle after that happened. How insensitive. But keep your focus on the pronouns because that is what matters most to you.
The deliberately misleading description of the tragedy is uncalled for. The circumstances have nothing to do with anybody's efforts to have a safe school environment.
nohero said:
The deliberately misleading description of the tragedy is uncalled for. The circumstances have nothing to do with anybody's efforts to have a safe school environment.
I disagree. Complaints were raised about security at Underhill before this tragedy happened on unsecured, unlit school property and were ignored. I am at the field several days a week and they now have security measures that were not in place before. I am sorry it had to take a tragedy to get those security measures.
Mom270 said:
nohero said:
The deliberately misleading description of the tragedy is uncalled for. The circumstances have nothing to do with anybody's efforts to have a safe school environment.
I disagree. Complaints were raised about security at Underhill before this tragedy happened on unsecured, unlit school property and were ignored. I am at the field several days a week and they now have security measures that were not in place before. I am sorry it had to take a tragedy to get those security measures.
You're implying that I didn't think that security at Underhill had to be better. I did not write that, and did not claim that.
The security issue at Underhill involves securing outdoor property after hours. "Safe schools" involves a safe school environment for students attending school, including after school activities. They're two different issues.
nohero said:
You're implying that I didn't think that security at Underhill had to be better. I did not write that, and did not claim that.
The security issue at Underhill involves securing outdoor property after hours. "Safe schools" involves a safe school environment for students attending school, including after school activities. They're two different issues.
Well you must not have a kid in school because teachers are not staying for after school activities due to a union job action, The district’s head of safety and security position has been unfilled since September 2020. There are fights and thefts in the schools, including MMS and CHS. The district said no cell phones after an MMS fight because kids recorded it. Personally I do not think that person’s moniker is appropriate and it will continue to grate me. YMMV.
nohero said:
I guess we've moved on from the tragedy at Underhill to other claims.
So changing the subject to safety and security is not allowed, but changing the subject to avoid talking about Cuttle’s phantom experience is allowed? Just want to ensure we’ve got the rules straight here.
michaelgoldberg said:
So changing the subject to safety and security is not allowed, but changing the subject to avoid talking about Cuttle’s phantom experience is allowed? Just want to ensure we’ve got the rules straight here.
Was the distinction that nohero made between the off-hours killing at Underwood and the safety and security issues in Mom270’s latest comment not clear?
DaveSchmidt said:
michaelgoldberg said:
So changing the subject to safety and security is not allowed, but changing the subject to avoid talking about Cuttle’s phantom experience is allowed? Just want to ensure we’ve got the rules straight here.
Was the distinction that nohero made between the off-hours killing at Underwood and the safety and security issues in Mom270’s latest comment not clear?
I literally have no idea what the point of Michael’s comment there was supposed to be.
nohero said:
DaveSchmidt said:
michaelgoldberg said:
So changing the subject to safety and security is not allowed, but changing the subject to avoid talking about Cuttle’s phantom experience is allowed? Just want to ensure we’ve got the rules straight here.
Was the distinction that nohero made between the off-hours killing at Underwood and the safety and security issues in Mom270’s latest comment not clear?
I literally have no idea what the point of Michael’s comment there was supposed to be.
I am fascinated by your repeated attempts to bury and distract from the discussion about how a candidate ran for BOE without disclosing their employment, source of income and education.
The good news is that the voters have spoken and that candidate lost overwhelmingly.
michaelgoldberg said:
I am fascinated by your repeated attempts to bury and distract from the discussion about how a candidate ran for BOE without disclosing their employment, source of income and education.
All I’m doing is waiting for you or anyone else to give your side of the discussion substance by acknowledging and addressing reasons that Cuttle may have had to not disclose.
michaelgoldberg said:
nohero said:
I literally have no idea what the point of Michael’s comment there was supposed to be.
I am fascinated by your repeated attempts to bury and distract from the discussion about how a candidate ran for BOE without disclosing their employment, source of income and education.
Still no idea what I wrote here that prompted this or any of your other “replies” to me.
DaveSchmidt said:
All I’m doing is waiting for you or anyone else to give your side of the discussion substance by acknowledging and addressing reasons that Cuttle may have had to not disclose.
I think the issue is on the one hand they claimed to be a teacher and principal but apparently it was “trans-phobic” to ask “Where?” There is no shame in being unemployed, especially during the pandemic, but the failure to own up to their employment history was not what I wanted to see on a BOE that is lacking in accountability and transparency. I would have liked to ask them some questions in the month before the election but did not see them out talking to voters. In any event, the subject is moot unless they run for public office again.
given wilrod23's responses here, all I can say is I'm glad the voters gave him trouncing he deserved.
Mom270 said:
I would have liked to ask them some questions in the month before the election but did not see them out talking to voters.
whatever else you want to say, the implication that Shannon wasn't out talking to voters is simply not true. Just because you don't see it doesn't mean it's not happening. Shannon canvassed all over the district, including very publicly at the Greenway opening.
ml1 said:
whatever else you want to say, the implication that Shannon wasn't out talking to voters is simply not true. Just because you don't see it doesn't mean it's not happening. Shannon canvassed all over the district, including very publicly at the Greenway opening.
I would gladly have gone to an event where they were campaigning if I saw any info on social media. Other candidates publicized in many local Facebook groups where they could be found for several weeks before the election. If anything like that was ever posted for Shannon I never saw it. It took a long time for Shannon to update their 2018 candidate statement to the Village Green and to put anything on their website about what their platform was. They could have done a lot more to publicize their public outreach, but it doesn’t matter now. To be clear, I think Shannon is a nice person. I just did not think they were the best candidate for the BOE and I think their election results were for the best.
Sponsored Business
Promote your business here - Businesses get highlighted throughout the site and you can add a deal.
Oh you mean, that was not a snarky comment? Sure seemed like it.