Create a New Forum Admin Login Member Login Contribute to Voyager Search VoyForums Help Desk VoyForums Exchange VoyForums Directory/Categories VoyForums Homepage VoyForums News FAQ - Frequently Asked Questions

[ Show ]

Support VoyForums

[ Shrink ]

VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, 2, 3, [4] ]

Subject: Chill pill? Author: Ned Depew [ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ] Date Posted: 10:42:03 07/18/05 Mon In reply to: Thomas Koulos 's message, "Regarding Easement issue" on 03:47:51 07/18/05 Mon Tom - while I agree in general with your position, that abuttors must be forced to allow access when public saftey is concerned - and when there is no other access available - I am not sure that this is the case here. Have you done the research and spoken to the property owners involved? Do they have an alternative proposal for repair equipment to reach the bridges? Is it possible that the town might be trying to take "the easy way out" at the expense of private property owners? Has this happened elsewhere? I have asked you before to please try to be civil in referring to those with whom you disagree. I am asking you again. While this issue might have something to do with a "self-serving mentality" (on either side!), it has nothing to do with a NIMBY attitude - it is people wanting to protect and preserve their own private property rights - quite a different thing. But the way you throw the term around, I am fairly certain you don't really think about what it means, simply use it as an all-purpose insult towards those who think differently than you do. If you can't post without being rude, please don't post here. [ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Replies:

[> [> Subject: Re: Chill pill? Author: Thomas Koulos [ Edit | View ] Date Posted: 13:50:59 07/18/05 Mon The Supervisor and Livingston Town Board have been elected to serve all the people in their community which to the best of my knoweledge they are doing.It's their call on how they will resolve the issue without resorting to going the Eminant Domain Route which is also an alternative that the phantom tax payers may have to pay as well as the Attorney fees,etc.because some people feel they live in a world of their own with no accountability to their neighbors etc.Since you are the fact finder on this Board go get the facts:):)Tom Koulos

[> [> [> Subject: It ain't me, babe Author: Ned Depew [ Edit | View ] Date Posted: 15:24:55 07/18/05 Mon Tom - You write: "Since you are the fact finder on this Board go get the facts." But I am not the "fact finder." I am the owner and moderator. If you post something here it you who are responsible for backing it up with facts, Tom. That's your responsibility, that goes along with your right of free speech. We've had this discussion before, but you still don't seem to understand that that right comes with reponsibilities - to try to be honest, factual, reasonable and civil. Unfortunately, you often fall short on all four counts.