Dot. Ave. debate
By adamg - 1/14/08 - 8:49 am
Larry Davidson reports on an e-mail message he got from "a well-known Dorchester community activist with an incendiary temperament" urging people to stay off Dorchester Avenue because of two recent shootings - only one of which was actually on Dot. Ave.
... In reply, a calmer community activist pointed out that that's the worst possible way to keep Dot Ave safe: if we cede it to the gangs, if good people stay away, then it will become the territory of the violent. We need more sunshine, not more hiding.
Comments
Well....good for the activist with the cooler head.
Kudos to the activist with the cooler head. He was right on when he said that staying holed up in their houses and off the streets isn't the answer. He recognized that more "eyes" on the street means less crime. Smart and streetwise is he.
...or she. Just sayin'.
...or she.
Just sayin'.
Or she
Yep, "she" is correct.
Who is this 'well-known activist' ?
If she's going to publicly announce that some neighborhood is unsafe, let's at least hear her name.
(I would have rather left this comment in your blog, but for some reason you have comments turned off there.)
Just a guess
Are there any well-known Dorchester community activists with an incendiary temperament who aren't named Bruce Wall?
Yes, there are tempermental activists not named Bruce Wall
The Dorchester Reporter identifies him:
Shame on this Barry Mullen
Is that his answer to problems in his own neighborhood? That doesn't solve anything and if he is a "civic activist" he should step aside. It serves no one to hide and give up their streets to thugs. That's how many of Dot has lost great little neighborhood to crime and neglect. Barry Mullen should consider this before sending out such an email.
Explanation
Ron Newman writes:
> If she's going to publicly announce that some neighborhood is unsafe,
> let's at least hear her name.
You have apparently misunderstood my response to Mollynotloggedin's reply to independentminded's comment about "the activist with the cooler head"; Mollynotloggedin said "or she," and I confirmed her correction, which was clearly about the second activist, not about the one who announced that Dot Ave was unsafe.
Anyway, you may say that he (the first activist) was announcing something publicly, but it was actually in an email message, as I had pointed out. Even though it was a mass email, I do not have the right to publish his name to those who were not on the list. Sorry.
> (I would have rather left this comment in your blog, but for some reason
> you have comments turned off there.)
I have comments turned off because they tend to generate flame wars and spam. Adam's blog is meant for general discussion, but as a public-school teacher I can't be in that position. You can imagine what would happen if somebody posted something inappropriate and it appeared on my blog (even though I wasn't the author of the comment). No schoolteacher can allow his or her blog to become a public forum.
Thanks for explanation
and sorry for misunderstanding you originally. Though I figure that any time an e-mail is sent to hundreds of people, that's the same as if it were said in public.