Fluff and Stuff

The Fluff


Yesterday set a new high for page views.  


Still not adept at reading and interpreting the analytics program information, but based on what I have figured out it was a viewers day to remember (for me anyway, and yes I again note that I realize not every page view equates to a separate person viewing).  

Don't get me wrong, I don't discount the fact that many of the views may have been generated in anticipation of a topic other than the "Debate Challenge".  That's okay.

It's okay because it generated several great comments (at least I think so).

It isn't about agreeing with me. It doesn't matter whether you are critical about what I may post.  It's about everyone taking the time to try and see the forest for the trees.  As one commentator put it:

It is important to be able to debate both sides of an issue for oneself and come to an educated and personal decision. Sometimes we get caught up in rhetoric or just "go with the crowd". Neither of these are good ways to make important community decisions.

These are very important observations, that people on both sides need to think about.

In the end we still may see things differently, but as long as we are all looking at the big picture, as long as people wish to comment in such a manner, it is a positive step in the right direction.

The Stuff (or I am sure for some, still fluff)

The stuff comes in response to the comments referenced above (although I think I mixed some stuff in with the fluff).

First and foremost, I want to make it clear there is nothing official about this blog.  I am not saying that is what the commentator meant to imply, it is simply a statement I think does need to be made periodically, especially when reference is made to me as a public official.

What I write here is personal opinion, plain and simple.  It is not endorsed, reviewed or approved by anyone else.  It is personal opinion.

Note: you need to read the entire comment to follow from this point on.  

Now whether I have "great" insights or not obviously would be determined by you the readers.

Have I shared any insights to date?  I would have to tell you I have.  They may not have been detailed, they may have been a bit cryptic, and I certainly haven't created a bullet list, but they are there.

Just how insightful I will get, just how crystal clear I will be, does unfortunately get dictated by a number of factors.  Is this just another example of me playing my cars close to the vest?  Yes it is.

There apparently is a strategy in place by those leading the opposition to the turbines.  Those following need to determine the validity of that strategy, and just where it will take them.  It is not for me to develop a winning strategy.  

Whatever insights I may have would not however help the opponents to the turbines with the upcoming town meeting article in February, nor the repeat of that same article come May.  

The article is not legal now, and will not be legal in May, no matter how many new Town Meeting Members there are.

Believe it or not, agree with it or not, but reassessing that particular plan of attack, along with the other proposed articles for the annual town meeting, is a thought I would recommend, and if you cannot figure out why, then my "insights" aren't going to help you.