Quote:
Originally Posted by worldlyhaligonian
Totally understand your opinion. The cringe is supposed to be more of a joke... that being said... the results of the past 20 years of being on this forum and seeing the results are very much scary.
We have to make light of it because it's so bad. Why are certain people on speed dial of local media when they often don't even live in proximity to a development???
I'm talking about both officials in how they vote (do we know who has voted against literally every development?) as well as private citizens who seemingly have the time to go out to every meeting or speak to every news outlet (how do they have access over people's balanced opinions on, for example, this forum)... but it isn't known to the wider public.
Go check the comments on FB posts in the HFX developments page vs what happens at meetings or in the news. Many anti-development folks would lead us to believe that the majority of people hold their beliefs.
Do we actually know how often we see particular people in news articles literally copy-paste either "why" a development isn't appropriate or use particular "tactics" that are, frankly, not activism... they're often mis-using public processes that aren't designed for this concerted approach (busybody rules, anyone?)
Thus, the point is to have a place where we can see the 'bigger' picture.
It could be argued that there are 100,000+ units of housing we don't currently have, but its hard to know. I thought it was redundant until recent activities (e.g., threats to sue our local government based on projects that have gone through legal processes).
Surely the status quo demands some scrutiny. Is there a way to change the thread name?
An alternative name to a place where data/info on developments go to never seen the light (or height  ) of day and the people who were involved in their demise? Is that wrong considering this is the public record and people choose to go stop housing from being built? I mean, it seems a bit stupid not to? |
Sorry, I didn't get the humour aspect when I first read it. It seemed more like a 'torches and pitchforks' kind of thing to me.
That said, your explanation makes it more clear, and I can see some value in it from a discussion standpoint, keeping in mind someone123's guidelines from a moderator's point of view.
For me, I would be more interested in how some members of council have performed from a development point of view, but even that is a little tricky as their job is to represent their district, and not just promote their personal beliefs, so IMHO this entire thread would need to be handled diplomatically (i.e. unlike how discussions involving bicycle lanes, etc. tend to evolve in this forum).
Also, I think an important part of a democracy is that people have a say in what happens in their city, so if a group opposes a development, it's their right to air their concerns, whether we agree with them or not. Pro-development groups should also have their say, and iMHO it's council's job to be able to sort through it all and make decisions that are for the betterment of the area and the city in general. We get frustrated when things don't go our way, but it's important to recognize that this is not undemocratic, it's actually closer to the opposite (unless there are unfair, dishonest practices happening behind the scenes, which we can not know about, nor should we speculate about).
At this point, a good amount of people have chimed in on the subject in this thread, so perhaps a new thread should be started (with a different name and a direct, thought-out "mission statement") so that the topic can be started cleanly. As for a title, I don't know, but maybe it should include something to the effect of development hurdles in Halifax, or thereabouts. It's up to you, as it's your thread.
