Coleman files in Carrboro

I have witnessed many cross country events at Carrboro Park. It takes runners almost 20 minutes to finish the course---and that is just the guys; the girls' race is started after the guys' race is underway. If traffic is halted for the entire time people would be sitting in their cars over 20 minutes. For the first race. The girls take a little longer to run the course.

In the days when my son ran, we waited for an opening in the runners then drove on through the roadway. No one stopped traffic for the entire race. No one stopped traffic at all. No one was hurt.

Carrboro High needs access to our parks as the grounds of the school may not yet be complete enough to allow for a cross country course.

Perhaps in the future it would be wise for the school to arrange for an officer to be on hand during the race to allow for safe passage of runners and vehicles.

I just read an interesting post on

http://squeezethepulp.com/viewtopic.php?t=581

I think this speaks for itself and puts a lot of these posts on OP in a little different perspective.

Posted by Paul Newton on September 13
"Just a couple of observations that I have noticed thus far:

1. The thread dedicated to Dan Coleman's candidacy on OrangePolitics.org was, presumably, created by Ruby Sinreich to promote Dan Coleman's candidacy as a "progressive." At the very least, I didn't notice any other threads at OrangePolitics dedicated to promoting other candidates for Carrboro Alderman. Perhaps I missed them?

2. The thread on OrangePolitics, which was intended to support Coleman's candidacy, has been quite effectively hijacked by Coleman's own actions and has been transformed into a liability for him (as a candidate for Alderman) rather than an asset. Those who wish to, for political reasons, perpetuate Dan's issue should most certainly continue to keep that topic "hot" on the Hot Topics section of OrangePolitics for easy reference for all.

3. By remaining relatively silent, Dan Coleman is allowing others to define his candidacy (and on Ruby's blog nonetheless!). Who can or will take advantage of the situation? Dan won't even discuss the matter on his own blog.

4. Would anyone care to wager on if and when Ruby Sinreich will close or delete that topic?"

I'm totally baffled that reporting on what someone said publicly could in any way be interpreted as out-of-line.

Although you don't have to be Sherlock Holmes to deduce that a lot of the posts lambasting Dan are polictically motivated. I thought it was interesting to see the actuall suggestion made that this was a political opportunity to be taken advantage of.

I know this is quite predictable, etc. but it does account for the many "full-speed-ahead" diatribes that made sloppy assumptions in a desire to get some serious licks in.

I'm not sure which is more offensive--the post itself or someone copying someone else's words from another forum and pasting them here. Posting this here is the most egregious violations of basic courtesy that I have seen in a good long while.

Tom,

I have posted on STP exactly once in the past 3 months and that was to stand up for Dan Coleman. If you had been following that forum you would know that I stopped posting there and you would know why (which I expect you actually do know).

You should also know by now that just because someone else did something doesn't make it right. If you want courtesy and respectful debate, Tom, you need to stand up for it with everyone, not just your friends.

The whole idea of the internet is to share information and create links to that information. Copying and pasting freely available information and citing its source is completely legitimate. (especially info on publicly available websites) Its not like Mark M. copied info from LexusNexus and pasted it to OP. I mean STP has a RSS feed. Its sharing this info by the nature of that feeds existence! What about Google? Should they not cache/index STP?

To claim what Mark M. did is a "egregious violation of basic courtesy" is counter to the goals of freedom of information and transparency.

Now somebody at STP is accusing Dan Coleman of suckpuppetry.

This is too much.

Who knew there was so much drama in Carrboro? Now I'll never finish my dissertation.

SOCK PUPPETTS OF THE WORLD UNIT!

Just wanted let everyone know I will be coming to the Carrboro Farmers Market on Saturday. I am not a taxpaying resident of Carrboro and I promise not to block traffic. I only ask Mr. Coleman and his supporters not to hit me with their vehicles or call 911.

P.S. I posted a similar comment on STP and I didn't want Mark M. or someone else to get in trouble by copying it here, cheers.

Thanks, Patrick. You are an upright guy.

Well, it seems that their have been XC meets at Anderson Park for years, and that the XC team volunteer was following protocol. I shan't post from another blog to this one, since THAT protocol is still in question, but if you go to the comments section on Orange Chat and scroll down to "Jessica's" comment--it would appear that the monitors will be wearing safety vests from now on. http://blogs.newsobserver.com/orangechat/index.php?title=cross_country_m...

Perhaps their more "Official" appearance will cause people to heed their pleas and directions.

Will the safety vests include what town they reside in?

Do YOU live in Carrboro?

oops.

I meant "UNITE!"

But, if there is a sockpuppet *unit*, I'd like to watch a practice/game/performance.

I am not too sure why I am adding to the frenzy, but I guess that I feel that I have to share some thoughts.
First of all, I agree with Duncan's 9/11 post entirely.
I think that if this is put simply, maybe all the divisiveness can be put to rest.
1) No one who is volunteering to protect anyone's safety should be abused, no ifs, ands, or buts.
2) My GUESS would be that Dan was running late and was probably angrier at himself than anyone else.
3) We have all transgressed, and despite that, we are still responsible for everything that we do.
4) This would have been closer to a non event if Dan had "owned" his action and apologized, but all of this discussion is making it increasingly hard to do so-although that is not a good enough excuse.
5) A lot of OP posters seem to be picking up the negative model that was presented and are sniping at each other. Why? I thought that OP was about agreeing to disagree, but on an adult level-not nit-picking and/or playing Gotchya or being insulting.
Let's not replicate Dan's mistake.

Well, I've re-read some of my posts. And I might have been a little too snarky. I've had folks say nasty things about me online, and I didn't like it. So, next time, I'll try not to cast the first stone...

"FYI, I think that sharing information from other sites should be encouraged as long as the source is linked/cited, the information is true and useful, and good editing and judgment are employed."

I agree Ruby. However, copying verbatim someone else's post from another forum, when there is a history of animosity between posters to the two forums, is not good judgment IMHO. What purpose did it serve other than to stir the pot in an already contentious discussion by holding the quoted individual up for the mockery of the people who read OP?

From what I've read at the Electronic Frontier Foundation, just as in other forms of published writing, the legally preferred means of referencing someone else's words on a blog is to quote a portion of their writing or paraphrase it, and provide a link so that others may read the post in its entirety.

I note that some people have been faulting Dan Coleman for not quickly taking responsibility for and apologizing for this incident.

Politically, that might have been a sound thing to do.

Legally, not so much. He is charged with misdemeanor assault right now. If I were his lawyer, I'd urge him to keep his mouth closed, and certainly not to publicly fess up or apologize, unless he was also planning on pleading guilty.

There were two outstanding letters of endorsement for Dan Coleman's candidacy for the Carrboro Board of Aldermen in this mornings CHN. The focus of these letters was on Dan's ability as an alderman and on his long history of service to our community. I think that it time to concentrate on the various candidates relative merits and move off what I consider to be an overblown parking lot altercation. That's my two cents worth this am. James

Dan Coleman has now admitted to, and apologized for, all the incidents of which he was accused. From this morning's N&O:

"I apologize to Ms. Kotecki for hitting her with my car. I acknowledge the importance of the volunteer work she was doing in the park that day. And I recognize that when she put her hands on my cat it was out of concern fot the safety of the runners."

"I thank Ms. Kotecki for her willingness to talk this through and I thank the Dispute Settlement Center and the courts for making mediation possible."

Nobody better touch my cat!

Ms Kotecki is a class act. Having been a bicyclist for many years, I know how scary it is to be threatened by someone in a car. I hope the parents of the cross country kids have chipped in to help pay her legal fees.

I guess that solves it, since he has admitted to it. I was sympathetic to him before I heard him tying up the 911 lines and demanding a police officer on the scene for this minor problem.

I hope that Dan learns from this. All my dealings with him
on various committees over a decade have shown that
he is very smart, hard-working, and a good communicator.
Unfortunately he has also been very argumentative and
hot-tempered, so everything I read about this incident was
consistent with my experiences.

Frequently we read about Washington politicians and
organizations that make a mistake, which is bad, but then
try to cover it up by fabricating a justification instead of
simply apologizing, which only makes matters worse for
them. This is exactly what Dan did. He lost his cool at the
park, but instead of apologizing, he tried to justify it with an after-the-fact written statement. Unfortunately for Dan,
witnesses contradicted
his story, so his justification failed. Now he's been
punished, both politically and financially (legal costs)
and I hope he learns to temper his argumentative ways.

To what degree will this put his political campaign in peril?
I have no idea.