ADRM said:
It'd be great if, once this project is finally approved and there's more consistent basis for substantive discussion on the development itself, all of the ignorantly anti-KWT cavemen on this thread would beat it, forever. To any of you who quickly dismiss KWT, the policies she's supported, or her demeanour in any way: have you actually met her, even once? Had her deal with a constituent issue of yours? Seen her debate from the floor of Council? Interacted with her in a private enterprise capacity? I'd bet my bottom dollar that the answer is no, of course not, to each.

Much more likely is that, probably at best, you saw an edited video of her partaking in a round of respectful, adult, critical debate that happened to run counter to your oddly composed viewpoints on a particular issue and said "oh yeah, she's the worst", or probably something much more sexist, and then hopped on here to display your Neanderthal tendencies for all to see, all behind the protection of anonymity afforded by an online thread—that's just the peak of cowardice, you retrograde simpletons.

KWT as my councillor, has been professional, helpful, responsive, and caring. Nothing less, ever. If she does indeed choose not to stand for re-election, it'll be Toronto and Ward 27's sincere and significant loss. One can only hope her eventual replacement is as dedicated and capable. If you want Mammoliti or Perruzza or one of those sorts to take over for her, feel free to move to rural Texas—there are lots of those sorts of wonderfully eloquent and intelligent urbanists there.
Click to expand...
Chill out... I thought the moderators said this sort of discussion is no longer permitted... Also, are you lumping me into the "caveman" group? Because, guess what... I've met KWT on several occasions. Heck I once even posed for a photo with her.
 
Stupidandshallow said:
Chill out... I thought the moderators said this sort of discussion is no longer permitted... Also, are you lumping me into the "caveman" group? Because, guess what... I've met KWT on several occasions. Heck I once even posed for a photo with her.
Click to expand...

I agree - tone down the name calling please, and the sexism thing is past due and should not be raised as a point of discussion.

MoD

And for the record, I do have issues with KWT - mainly around being reactive with the various heritage structures being demolished.

AoD
 
"Chill out with the name calling"—are you serious? I'd love to see that request more consistently levied by moderators against the actual offenders, rather than those among the community who step in to call out the baseless claimers (and worse).

It's not conducive to good discussions to have the flow be "baseless claim 1"; "baseless claim 2"; "baseless claim 3"; "sexist claim 1"; "baseless claim 4"; "level-headed retort to the 4 baseless and 1 sexist claims"; "moderator chiming in to tell everyone to knock it off"; "baseless claimers get one more retort."

If folks have legitimate points to raise about specific items that KWT—or any councillor—has raised with this or any specific development, let's have those raised and debate it out; I'll never be opposed to that dynamic. I'd love to talk about actual aspects of this development that are currently under consideration—as the moderator had helpfully attempted to foster—but it then devolved back into the unhelpful conjecture and unsubstantiated claims.
 
^ Agreed. For that matter, how is unsubstantiated and unfair claims that KWT can't respond to (as you have pointed out yourself i42 - not AoD lol) acceptable but calling out those claims is not? I appreciate the desire for politeness and civility on this forum but I think in return the constant insults and baseless lies about KWT (and other councillors for that matter) should be moderated too. It's the reason these fights are starting in the first place.
 
Well said, authors of the last two. Back to the development: I looked through the devapp and couldn't find the definitive answer; does anyone know if the s37 considerations with this app will be 100% dedicated to the construction of the POPS on the Bay St. side of the development and the provisions for public passage through the atrium and knockout walls and such below-grade, or are there expected to be additional funds-in-lieu contributed?
 
wolfewood said:
^ Agreed. For that matter, how is unsubstantiated and unfair claims that KWT can't respond to (as you have pointed out yourself i42 - not AoD lol) acceptable but calling out those claims is not? I appreciate the desire for politeness and civility on this forum but I think in return the constant insults and baseless lies about KWT (and other councillors for that matter) should be moderated too. It's the reason these fights are starting in the first place.
Click to expand...
We do have a thread where this kind of discussion is more appropriate, here: http://urbantoronto.ca/forum/threads/ridiculous-comments-and-claims-made-by-city-councillors.24788

If someone thinks something KWT (or any councilor) has done is inappropriate and is deserving of discussion, (such as allegations KWT is stalling this development) then I think that is a better place to post it, without derailing this thread and being in the right thread where people would be interested in legitimate discussion on a Councillor's actions.
 
Stupidandshallow said:
Chill out... I thought the moderators said this sort of discussion is no longer permitted... Also, are you lumping me into the "caveman" group? Because, guess what... I've met KWT on several occasions. Heck I once even posed for a photo with her.
Click to expand...
I did not call for an end to a discussion on what City Councillors may have done. What I called for an end of was lazy, unsubstantiated claims of wrongdoing, that amount to little more than slander. If you're going to bring some real evidence to back up a complaint, go for it. We are trying for a place where the the level of discussion is higher than that of was is essentially name-calling.

42
 
ADRM said:
"Chill out with the name calling"—are you serious? I'd love to see that request more consistently levied by moderators against the actual offenders, rather than those among the community who step in to call out the baseless claimers (and worse).

It's not conducive to good discussions to have the flow be "baseless claim 1"; "baseless claim 2"; "baseless claim 3"; "sexist claim 1"; "baseless claim 4"; "level-headed retort to the 4 baseless and 1 sexist claims"; "moderator chiming in to tell everyone to knock it off"; "baseless claimers get one more retort."

If folks have legitimate points to raise about specific items that KWT—or any councillor—has raised with this or any specific development, let's have those raised and debate it out; I'll never be opposed to that dynamic. I'd love to talk about actual aspects of this development that are currently under consideration—as the moderator had helpfully attempted to foster—but it then devolved back into the unhelpful conjecture and unsubstantiated claims.
Click to expand...
Yes... I am serious. "retrograde simpletons"..."Neanderthal tendencies"..."cavemen"... isn't calling someone else out, but simply name calling.

The one month deferral is the latest news in this application/development. Isn't discussing the latest TEYCC meeting and the reasoning behind the deferral appropriate. KWT has been on the record stating that she will delay this application or make it difficult (for the life of me, I cannot find the interview or recall the precise language, but when I do, I will post it). Is it not reasonable to then question her motives and this one month deferral? (acknowledging that personal attacks are unreasonable). The planning department is in favour of this application and put forward a recommendation for its approval with conditions. I don't think they always get it right, but I would definitely put more weight into planning than a local councillor.
 
interchange42 said:
I did not call for an end to a discussion on what City Councillors may have done. What I called for an end of was lazy, unsubstantiated claims of wrongdoing, that amount to little more than slander. If you're going to bring some real evidence to back up a complaint, go for it. We are trying for a place where the the level of discussion is higher than that of was is essentially name-calling.

42
Click to expand...
... I was referring to post #3017 by @AlvinofDiaspar
 
I agree with everything you've said, "Stupidandshallow." For what it's worth, my intention wasn't to lump in everyone critical of KWT in those characterizations, and I apologize if that's how it was taken by some, including yourself. I was reserving that commentary for the folks who, on this thread, without any reasonable grounds, have claimed or intimated that KWT was:
> Holding personal grudges and letting them affect her judgment or conduct
> "Going after someone and making their life difficult over a lost cause"
> Among the group of elected individuals who are, in a majority, a "waste of space"
> A chronic promise-breaker
> "Badly wanting to derail this project"
> "Getting what she wanted all along" and "attacking the development" at every opportunity
> Consistently "screwing over" the residents of Ward 27
> Snarky and unprofessional
> Not smiling enough

And that's before even going back to the more overtly awful (and even less project-related) commentary about her appearance, etc. My personal opinion is that calling out the folks behind that commentary is more calling a spade a spade than resorting to name calling. Either way, I'll leave it to the moderators henceforth on this thread, and hope that the discussion does indeed return to a higher calibre.

Also, for what it's worth, KWT isn't the only councillor who's continued to raise questions with this development. Like it or not, there is a staunch group of NIMBYs in this ward (as is the case with most), and many are politically active; there's an element of councillors needing to be cognizant of a dichotomy of viewpoints amongst their constituents and giving a voice to some legitimate concerns that emanate therefrom.

I think the debate around this project via the official and established channels is healthy—some legitimate concerns have been raised and are being addressed in various ways. Some may never be resolved to the satisfaction of some, but that's the nature of the process (and democracy!), and that's fine. Still, I'd be shocked if this project doesn't move forward in a manner very close to its intended fashion.
 
Final1.jpg
Final3.jpg
Just having some fun designing a tower for this site! Thoughts?
 

Attachments

  • Final1.jpg
    Final1.jpg
    460 KB · Views: 727
  • Final3.jpg
    Final3.jpg
    1.3 MB · Views: 716
Last edited by a moderator:
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top