Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
RedScare

MetroRail University Line On Richmond

Recommended Posts

Did I say "ELEVATE the roads?" No. I said what I said for a reason. It's easier to simply make a small underpass for the train than to make an overpass for the roads OR the rail.

Edited by ricco67

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I attended the meeting today at South Main Baptist Church.

I was very pleasantly surprised that the speakers spoke out in favor of the Richmond to Cummins option/pro-rail by about a 10 to 1 margin. The anti-rail crowd was definitely outnumbered.

The best part was the almost absolute universal rejection of Culberson's stupid route option over the freeway.

Pro-rail speakers for rail on Richmond to Cummins to the West and Eastwood Transit Center on the East included several business owners on Richmond, several heads of neighborhood organizations (only 1 neighborhood organization spoke out against it although I did leave at 4), a UST Professor of Int'l Studies, a UH student who lives one block North of Richmond/Montrose, Irving Phillips (architect), Sue Lovell from city council who also happens to live 2 blocks away from Richmond, and at least 30 folks who live within 1 to 5 blocks of the proposed routes.

From the opposition, only one claimed to be a Richmond Avenue resident and none (during the 2 hours that I was there) claimed to own a business on the route.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Did I say "ELEVATE the roads?" No. I said what I said for a reason. It's easier to simply make a small underpass for the train than to make an overpass for the roads OR the rail.

and you said nothing about elevating the rail, until now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can't see how you could have missed it, but whatever.

As far as the "theory" goes, what is meant is that cars will come out at predictable points crossing going across.

I go out of my way at times to cross Montrose at a light as opposed to crossing at say, Kipling, Sul Ross, or Marshall. It's just plain safer to cross when the traffic is managed as opposed to trying to cross a major street with a bunch of random cars going at random speeds.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I attended the meeting today at South Main Baptist Church.

I was very pleasantly surprised that the speakers spoke out in favor of the Richmond to Cummins option/pro-rail by about a 10 to 1 margin. The anti-rail crowd was definitely outnumbered.

The best part was the almost absolute universal rejection of Culberson's stupid route option over the freeway.

Pro-rail speakers for rail on Richmond to Cummins to the West and Eastwood Transit Center on the East included several business owners on Richmond, several heads of neighborhood organizations (only 1 neighborhood organization spoke out against it although I did leave at 4), a UST Professor of Int'l Studies, a UH student who lives one block North of Richmond/Montrose, Irving Phillips (architect), Sue Lovell from city council who also happens to live 2 blocks away from Richmond, and at least 30 folks who live within 1 to 5 blocks of the proposed routes.

From the opposition, only one claimed to be a Richmond Avenue resident and none (during the 2 hours that I was there) claimed to own a business on the route.

Thanks for the update, KinkaidAlum. I'm really glad to hear that the pro-rail side was well represented!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It isn't about thinking or guessing his group is outnumbered.

His group IS outnumbered. Just check the membership rosters, petition signatures, and even just glance around the Inner Loop to look at the support for the rail signs in MANY neighborhoods with the opposition signs being almost 100% centered in Afton Oaks.

I wouldn't be so sure - the referendum was a pretty close vote - and when you consider that it included language that made many voters think the rail would be on Westpark, It makes me wonder if it would have passed if it had been called the Richmond Corridor.

If we are so vastly outnumbered as you claim Kinkaid then why was there ever any doubt that the rail would run exactly where METRO wanted it, why have there been so many townhall meetings, and so many different route proposals? Could it just be that the anti coalition is larger than any of you give it credit for? Which would mean of course that many of you are (God forbid, how could it be????) WRONG? LOL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Turning left really isn't that big of an issue, while it may take a bit to get used to, making all right turns is something that we'll get used to. I've had to do so on W. Alabama for years. I whined about it at first, but after awhile it isn't a big deal.

I think it's not that big of a deal on Main, since you can always just turn right and make a block...still a pain, but do-able. But what if you're on Richmond? The "make a block" option just isn't there, as you'd have to go who knows how far out of the way to get to a crossing. That would lead one to think they should just have more crossings, but that means more stop lights - can you imagine going down the length of Richmond with that many more lights?

I just wish there was a better solution...unfortunately, better = more $$, and I just can't imagine that ever happening when we can just throw a rail at-grade for relatively cheap. Just seems like an awkward solution.. Does Dallas have these same problems?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If we are so vastly outnumbered as you claim Kinkaid then why was there ever any doubt that the rail would run exactly where METRO wanted it, why have there been so many townhall meetings, and so many different route proposals? Could it just be that the anti coalition is larger than any of you give it credit for? Which would mean of course that many of you are (God forbid, how could it be????) WRONG? LOL

Whether or not there is much opposition, there should still be planning, meetings, different proposals, environmental impact studies, etc. before the final route is chosen. Nobody pro-rail says it should go wherever Metro wants it. They say it should go wherever it will serve the most people and impact the least - basically where it makes the most sense. And I think we've narrowed it down.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Whether or not there is much opposition, there should still be planning, meetings, different proposals, environmental impact studies, etc. before the final route is chosen. Nobody pro-rail says it should go wherever Metro wants it. They say it should go wherever it will serve the most people and impact the least - basically where it makes the most sense. And I think we've narrowed it down.

So what your saying then Jax is that if there had been zero opposition to Railroading Richmond there would have been exactly the same number of meetings, route proposals etc. The reason METRO wanted to run down Richmond in their original plan - through Afton Oaks and under 610 etc according to METRO was ridership, numbers, butts in the seats. According to METRO transitioning to Westpark east of Sage severely affected those precious ridership numbers, or so they said in the many meetings that I went to. What you are saying is that basically the miniscule anti rail coalition had virtually no effect on the process. The only effect we had was on the final route. That is an interesting take - does everyone on your little planet see it that way?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Can't see how you could have missed it, but whatever.

As far as the "theory" goes, what is meant is that cars will come out at predictable points crossing going across.

I go out of my way at times to cross Montrose at a light as opposed to crossing at say, Kipling, Sul Ross, or Marshall. It's just plain safer to cross when the traffic is managed as opposed to trying to cross a major street with a bunch of random cars going at random speeds.

Agreed. I was taught when I first started driving to always "go to the stoplight". It's safer, easier, and sometimes can even save more time. I'll actually make a right out of a lot, drive to the nearest light, turn, go back to the intersection (using a lot or local street) and wait. My safety is much more important than catching McDonald's before they stop serving breakfast. Houston has such high car insurance rates because of impatient drivers wanting to get where they want, when they want, not considering their fellow drivers. Hurried distracted drivers lead to more accidents.

Here's a hint--leave early, allowing for interruptions--like a train or one of those bat-outta-Hades minivans/suvs with the soccer balls on the back.

Edited by GovernorAggie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So what your saying then Jax is that if there had been zero opposition to Railroading Richmond there would have been exactly the same number of meetings, route proposals etc. The reason METRO wanted to run down Richmond in their original plan - through Afton Oaks and under 610 etc according to METRO was ridership, numbers, butts in the seats. According to METRO transitioning to Westpark east of Sage severely affected those precious ridership numbers, or so they said in the many meetings that I went to. What you are saying is that basically the miniscule anti rail coalition had virtually no effect on the process. The only effect we had was on the final route. That is an interesting take - does everyone on your little planet see it that way?

Yes I believe there would have still been meetings, and there would have still been an environmental impact study (which in that case would have mentioned the impacts on Afton Oaks), and there would have still been multiple routes, an they still would have had to chose one of those routes. No, I'm not saying there would have been the exact same number of meetings in any situation, all I am saying is that yes there would have still been a planning process.

I'm not saying the anti-rail coalition had no effect on the process, I'm saying that your group isn't the reason the planning process existed in the first place.

The planning process exists regardless of an opposition movement. Yes, you guys most likely inflected the decision to exclude your part of Richmond from the line, I'm not saying you didn't. I'm saying that the fact that there was a planning process does not prove that the anti-rail folks are the majority, as you implied in your earlier post.

If we are so vastly outnumbered as you claim Kinkaid then why was there ever any doubt that the rail would run exactly where METRO wanted it, why have there been so many townhall meetings, and so many different route proposals? Could it just be that the anti coalition is larger than any of you give it credit for?

Is it even possible to discuss this issue intelligently without personal attacks like "does everyone on your little planet see it that way?", and accusing people of being influenced by the "liberal media", and all that crap?

Edited by Jax

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I wouldn't be so sure - the referendum was a pretty close vote - and when you consider that it included language that made many voters think the rail would be on Westpark, It makes me wonder if it would have passed if it had been called the Richmond Corridor.

If you took the number of people who would of switched there vote from yes to no because of Richmond, it would have still passed. Some how I find it hard to believe that the anti-rail people actually voted yes.

If we are so vastly outnumbered as you claim Kinkaid then why was there ever any doubt that the rail would run exactly where METRO wanted it, why have there been so many townhall meetings, and so many different route proposals? Could it just be that the anti coalition is larger than any of you give it credit for? Which would mean of course that many of you are (God forbid, how could it be????) WRONG? LOL

1) Metro is going to get the route that it wants. Down Richmond to Greenway plaza. If anything, the Afton Oaks route was a "Red Herring" to make the Richmond-Cummins-Westpark route look like a compromise.

2) You and the anti-rail group are a little full of yourself if you think that the townhall meetings and different route proposals were because of you. Hello, it is called the law. They are required to do it.

Face the facts, Metro got what they wanted and you and your group help make them look like they compromised to get it. Suckers.

Edited by wakester

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I wouldn't be so sure - the referendum was a pretty close vote - and when you consider that it included language that made many voters think the rail would be on Westpark, It makes me wonder if it would have passed if it had been called the Richmond Corridor.

If you're going to assume that people would have voted "NO" if the word "RICHMOND" had been on the ballot, you must also assume that some people voted "NO" because of the word "WESTPARK" being on the ballot. Afton Oaks does not corner the market on NIMBYs, I'm afraid.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If you took the number of people who would of switched there vote from yes to no because of Richmond, it would have still passed. Some how I find it hard to believe that the anti-rail people actually voted yes.

it wasn't about rail vs no rail. METRO preferred to present this as an overall plan because they knew their support for rail alone would be weak because it will only serve a small portion of the population vs their total serve area. they had to group bus/hov/rail/etc to the election so they would get as much support as possible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
it wasn't about rail vs no rail. METRO preferred to present this as an overall plan because they knew their support for rail alone would be weak because it will only serve a small portion of the population vs their total serve area. they had to group bus/hov/rail/etc to the election so they would get as much support as possible.

They did it exactly as it should have been done. It's about the overall system, not just the rail system.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
They did it exactly as it should have been done. It's about the overall system, not just the rail system.

but it is the changes that have been made since the vote that have caused the backlash. not sure if METRO had a REAL plan.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One thing that confuses me about the "ballot wording" arguments...Westpark the street doesnt exist until Kirby...what street is the "Westpark corridor" between downtown and Kirby?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
One thing that confuses me about the "ballot wording" arguments...Westpark the street doesnt exist until Kirby...what street is the "Westpark corridor" between downtown and Kirby?

Exactly.

It scares me to think that so many wealthy white folks from Afton Oaks would have such difficulty with reading comprehension.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Exactly.

It scares me to think that so many wealthy white folks from Afton Oaks would have such difficulty with reading comprehension.

I'm guessing it's more about having any knife in a gunfight.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If you took the number of people who would of switched there vote from yes to no because of Richmond, it would have still passed. Some how I find it hard to believe that the anti-rail people actually voted yes. Face the facts, Metro got what they wanted and you and your group help make them look like they compromised to get it. Suckers.
As long as we are talking facts I suppose you have some data to back your first statement up. I would be most interested to know how that data was gathered and by whom. I think it is just speculation or wishful thinking on your part.In your last statement you give METRO far too much credit - I doubt that anyone believes that METRO was farsighted enough to play the Houston public as you suggest. The other fallcy in that last statemnet is that you assume like so many others have that the anti rail coalition is just AO - IT IS MUCH MORE!
I'm guessing it's more about having any knife in a gunfight.
of course you are ASS/U/MING that every AO voter took the time to read every word on the ballot - I doubt that was the case.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is some interesting info about voters along Richmond - beore and after Culberson / Wong voiced their anti-rail views

here,

and here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
There is some interesting info about voters along Richmond - beore and after Culberson / Wong voiced their anti-rail views

here,

and here.

The links are to sites that most folks would consider biased and all of the information is less than a year old, and the referendum was in 2002 as I recall. This hardly verifies your statement Jax . . . . but at least you went to the trouble of searching for the facts and for that I applaud you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
There is some interesting info about voters along Richmond - beore and after Culberson / Wong voiced their anti-rail views

here,

and here.

these are almost a yr old now. are these somehow related to the meeting yesterday?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought about not posting it because I knew you would think it was biased. I think the numbers are accurate though, whether you take the discussion seriously or not.

Nope, not related to the meeting yesterday, but relevant to the discussion I thought (or at least interesting). if not, just disregard them.

Edited by Jax

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I thought about not posting it because I knew you would think it was biased.

Nope, not related to the meeting yesterday, but relevant to the discussion I thought (or at least interesting). if not, just disregard them.

CTC is biased. go to a couple of their meetings and find out. disregarding.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
of course you are ASS/U/MING that every AO voter took the time to read every word on the ballot - I doubt that was the case.

No, I am assuming that the good citizens of AO are following the natural human tendency to grasp at any straw, no matter how ludicrous, to oppose something deemed undesirable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
One thing that confuses me about the "ballot wording" arguments...Westpark the street doesnt exist until Kirby...what street is the "Westpark corridor" between downtown and Kirby?
Exactly.

You are each missing the point as much as they are. If you read the ballot, METRO is effectively given the authority to put the line wherever they want.

Whatever name they gave to the route on the ballot never mattered in any capacity. If JJxvi raises the question about "what street is the "Westpark corridor" between downtown and Kirby," the answer is that there is no street; and perhaps a retort would be that as such there should be no rail there because there is no corridor by that name. But that isn't the answer. The name doesn't matter...except insofar as it confused stupid or careless voters.

Edited by TheNiche

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
As long as we are talking facts I suppose you have some data to back your first statement up. I would be most interested to know how that data was gathered and by whom. I think it is just speculation or wishful thinking on your part.In your last statement you give METRO far too much credit - I doubt that anyone believes that METRO was farsighted enough to play the Houston public as you suggest. The other fallcy in that last statemnet is that you assume like so many others have that the anti rail coalition is just AO - IT IS MUCH MORE!of course you are ASS/U/MING that every AO voter took the time to read every word on the ballot - I doubt that was the case.

Data, you want data to back up my argument? I will refer you to post # 2888 :

And as for providing Links for Highway6 I am not going to do your research

Not sure where you got that I was ASS/U/MING ( really what is that suppose to mean? I guess you are calling me an ASS? really not sure. Maybe I should ask my 13 year old nephew, that is around his maturity level) OK that I was assuming that every AO took time to read the ballot? I would say that you are not really putting fellow AOers in a very good light. They vote for things without knowing what they are voting for? Maybe what really happen is that your fellow AOers meant to vote NO and actually voted for Pat Buchanan. I would demand a recount. Check for pregnant chads!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If you took the number of people who would of switched there vote from yes to no because of Richmond, it would have still passed. Some how I find it hard to believe that the anti-rail people actually voted yes.

A small fraction of people outside of the area of contention tend to change their vote if it appears as though a powerful government agency is trying to ramrod something down a neighborhood's throat. Although they are relatively few in number, throughout METRO's service area, it could very well have tipped the scales. All it would've taken to threaten the outcome was 2% of voters. When you're playing with those margins, any tiny little bit of spin becomes highly valuable.

1) Metro is going to get the route that it wants. Down Richmond to Greenway plaza. If anything, the Afton Oaks route was a "Red Herring" to make the Richmond-Cummins-Westpark route look like a compromise.

2) You and the anti-rail group are a little full of yourself if you think that the townhall meetings and different route proposals were because of you. Hello, it is called the law. They are required to do it.

Face the facts, Metro got what they wanted and you and your group help make them look like they compromised to get it. Suckers.

I've been saying this for a long time. Glad to see someone caught on to it. METRO isn't always very good at transit, but they are profoundly good at politics.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
CTC is biased. go to a couple of their meetings and find out. disregarding.

I have been to a CTC meeting and that is where I drew my conclusion. Like it or not Musicman I am entitled to my own opinion - and sometimes it doesn't match yours

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Data, you want data to back up my argument? I will refer you to post # 2888 :

Not sure where you got that I was ASS/U/MING ( really what is that suppose to mean? I guess you are calling me an ASS? really not sure. Maybe I should ask my 13 year old nephew, that is around his maturity level) OK that I was assuming that every AO took time to read the ballot? I would say that you are not really putting fellow AOers in a very good light. They vote for things without knowing what they are voting for? Maybe what really happen is that your fellow AOers meant to vote NO and actually voted for Pat Buchanan. I would demand a recount. Check for pregnant chads!

I can only speak for those that I was actually in the voting booth with as to whether or not they read everything, and/or understood everything on the ballot. . . . . . those meaning me. I seriously doubt that every AO resident that voted read all of it and/or understood all of it. If that reflects poorly on my neighborhood so be it. All you have to do is read some of the posts on here (or any other forum) to realize that the number of idiots among the general population is a surprisingly high percentage. I am quite certain that Niche, Musicman and a few of the other posters on here that I respect probably feel the same way. I am also certain that there is a large number of posters on here that think I am an idiot - while they may deny it, most of them feel that way because I don't agree with the majority opinion of this post.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I have been to a CTC meeting and that is where I drew my conclusion. Like it or not Musicman I am entitled to my own opinion - and sometimes it doesn't match yours

i was responding to jax, not you. ;) and i agree we are entitled to our own opinions. never thought otherwise.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You are each missing the point as much as they are. If you read the ballot, METRO is effectively given the authority to put the line wherever they want.

Whatever name they gave to the route on the ballot never mattered in any capacity. If JJxvi raises the question about "what street is the "Westpark corridor" between downtown and Kirby," the answer is that there is no street; and perhaps a retort would be that as such there should be no rail there because there is no corridor by that name. But that isn't the answer. The name doesn't matter...except insofar as it confused stupid or careless voters.

I am not missing the point. You are stating exactly what my belief is, my question is only to show that claims that the ballot specified Westpark are ridiculous. The specific wording in the ballot indicated we were authorizing Metro to build a line from "Wheeler Station to Hillcroft Transit Center." The name/heading for this corridor was given as "4. WESTPARK"

Westpark was the name of the corridor because the Hilcroft Park and Ride is the destination (ie on Westpark) not because it was supposed to travel completely on Westpark Dr, which nevertheless is impossible since westpark dr does not travel from Hilcroft Transit Center all the way into downtown at Wheeler Station. Another street or ROW would have to be used for the eastern section of the "WESTPARK" line. A street like Richmond, maybe since coincidentally Wheeler sStation is at Main St and Richmond/Wheeler...

Edited by JJxvi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The links are to sites that most folks would consider biased and all of the information is less than a year old, and the referendum was in 2002 as I recall. This hardly verifies your statement Jax . . . . but at least you went to the trouble of searching for the facts and for that I applaud you.
Only AftonAg would think ELECTION RESULTS are inherently biased. Maybe you think local elections should have an electoral college too?
You are each missing the point as much as they are. If you read the ballot, METRO is effectively given the authority to put the line wherever they want.Whatever name they gave to the route on the ballot never mattered in any capacity. If JJxvi raises the question about "what street is the "Westpark corridor" between downtown and Kirby," the answer is that there is no street; and perhaps a retort would be that as such there should be no rail there because there is no corridor by that name. But that isn't the answer. The name doesn't matter...except insofar as it confused stupid or careless voters.
Wow. Did his factitiousness really go that far over your head?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
i was responding to jax, not you. ;) and i agree we are entitled to our own opinions. never thought otherwise.

Sorry Musicman my mistake. That you would have thought otherwise was a surprise to me as you are one of the few on here that sees clearly the majority of the time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I can only speak for those that I was actually in the voting booth with as to whether or not they read everything, and/or understood everything on the ballot. . . . . . those meaning me. I seriously doubt that every AO resident that voted read all of it and/or understood all of it. If that reflects poorly on my neighborhood so be it. All you have to do is read some of the posts on here (or any other forum) to realize that the number of idiots among the general population is a surprisingly high percentage. I am quite certain that Niche, Musicman and a few of the other posters on here that I respect probably feel the same way. I am also certain that there is a large number of posters on here that think I am an idiot - while they may deny it, most of them feel that way because I don't agree with the majority opinion of this post.

The ASS/U/MING is a very old joke, and slightly out of context. What it means is this - when ever one assumes they make an Ass of u or me. The point is that assumptions are always dangerous to base an argument on - if the assumption is wrong the argument is then pointless.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Only AftonAg would think ELECTION RESULTS are inherently biased. Maybe you think local elections should have an electoral college too?Wow. Did his factitiousness really go that far over your head?

Election results are fact, no further discussion required. So having said that you must agree that George Bush soundly defeated Gore and won the 2000 Presidential election fair and square right? no bias, just fact. Yet you boldly state that only I would think Election Results are inherently biased. Go on with your righteous self.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Wow. Did his factitiousness really go that far over your head?

Apparently yes. I fail to see how his remarks were at all factitious.

He argued poorly. The issue is not that a corridor named in the ballot does not exist. It is that the name doesn't matter.

You replied by saying "exactly," but he was inexact.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I am also certain that there is a large number of posters on here that think I am an idiot -

Thank you for the opportunity to agree. Yes, I think you are an uninformed imposter; i.e idiot-your word. Again you have choosen to prove yourself to be the fraud you introduced yourself as: someone with little or no knowledge of the neighborhood you claim to live in; woefully lacking in any facts regarding ballot process and a consistant pattern of immature lanquage that makes even the most simpleton among the HAIFarati question your verasity. The only thing more pathetic is the credibility given you by some of your enabelers.

Reply or not-I don't subscribe to forums any longer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thank you for the opportunity to agree. Yes, I think you are an uninformed imposter; i.e idiot-your word. Again you have choosen to prove yourself to be the fraud you introduced yourself as: someone with little or no knowledge of the neighborhood you claim to live in; woefully lacking in any facts regarding ballot process and a consistant pattern of immature lanquage that makes even the most simpleton among the HAIFarati question your verasity. The only thing more pathetic is the credibility given you by some of your enabelers.

Reply or not-I don't subscribe to forums any longer.

I must point out that Nmainguy was caught posting under the alias Aftonowl. Claiming to live in Afton Oaks and be a pro rail advocate. A rather nasty flame war ensued the details of which aren't worth repeating. I will not dignify his comments further as it might lend credibility to a real imposter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Did anyone else attend yesterday's meeting? One of the earlier posts said that the pro-Richmond comments outnumbered the against comments by about 10 to 1, but the Chronicle said it was about even. Anyone have a 3rd point of view?

I'm also surprised that I couldn't find any coverage by the 3 main TV stations. Maybe it was due to the Astros' news.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Apparently yes. I fail to see how his remarks were at all factitious.He argued poorly. The issue is not that a corridor named in the ballot does not exist. It is that the name doesn't matter.You replied by saying "exactly," but he was inexact.
Regardless of the wording, existence of a Westpark corridor etc, etc, etc, ad nauseum - The ballot read Westpark corridor and the very instant that METRO announced that the Westpark corridor really meant Richmond a hue and cry went up immediately from the anti rail on richmond coalition, there wasn't any strategizing, no attack plan - just a cry of foul. A cry that resonates to this day and will continue to resonate to the day the first train turns south on Cummins . . . . .
Did anyone else attend yesterday's meeting? One of the earlier posts said that the pro-Richmond comments outnumbered the against comments by about 10 to 1, but the Chronicle said it was about even. Anyone have a 3rd point of view?I'm also surprised that I couldn't find any coverage by the 3 main TV stations. Maybe it was due to the Astros' news.
The comments were about even - perhaps a posters report was biased? No TV because there was no bloodshed, there was no violence, and all in all it was a rather calm and respectful group which translates to boring to the big 3. Don't even try it - I already said I didn't go to the meeting, but that doesn't mean that I haven't spoken to several of the anti's (people that I trust to be truthful) that were at the meeting just to get their perspective.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I must point out that Nmainguy was caught posting under the alias Aftonowl. Claiming to live in Afton Oaks and be a pro rail advocate. A rather nasty flame war ensued the details of which aren't worth repeating. I will not dignify his comments further as it might lend credibility to a real imposter.

I did a search for a member named Aftonowl so I could read these flame-war posts you refer to. I found nothing though. What page was this flame war on?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I did a search for a member named Aftonowl so I could read these flame-war posts you refer to. I found nothing though. What page was this flame war on?

aftonag is correct....nmain has masqueraded as multiple identities.

Edited by musicman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Marty
aftonag is correct....nmain has masqueraded as multiple identities.

I think not, nmainguy is nmainguy right or wrong if he had an alter ego anyone can figure that out.

peace my friend. :P

Edited by Marty

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think not, nmainguy is nmainguy right or wrong if he had an alter ego anyone can figure that out.

peace my friend. :P

an IP address speaks wonders.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Did anyone else attend yesterday's meeting? One of the earlier posts said that the pro-Richmond comments outnumbered the against comments by about 10 to 1, but the Chronicle said it was about even. Anyone have a 3rd point of view?

I'm also surprised that I couldn't find any coverage by the 3 main TV stations. Maybe it was due to the Astros' news.

The Chronicle is guilty of lazy journalism. About half of the comments they posted as being "against rail" or "against certain routes" were totally taken out of context.

The only thing the anti-rail crowd did more of was clapping, which the crowd was told not to do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Marty
an IP address speaks wonders.

Can you see my IP address? No

lets get back on topic Metro is a waste of tax payers monies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I did a search for a member named Aftonowl so I could read these flame-war posts you refer to. I found nothing though. What page was this flame war on?
I believe the editor removed the "flame war posts".
The Chronicle is guilty of lazy journalism. About half of the comments they posted as being "against rail" or "against certain routes" were totally taken out of context. The only thing the anti-rail crowd did more of was clapping, which the crowd was told not to do.
Yeah that anti rail crowd is a bunch of classless rebels - always railing against authority - actually clapping even though they were told not to. Civil disobedience at its most polite. I think many may have been charter members of the SDS - Probably some Weather Underground members in the ranks too . . . Arm The Spirit - The Weather Lives!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
aftonag is correct....nmain has masqueraded as multiple identities.

He has also stated that he'll never post again elsewhere on the forum. ...and yet here he is. :rolleyes:

I doubt that we've seen the last of him, his alter egos, quotations out of context, ad hominems, or his flame-outs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...