Page 5 of 10 FirstFirst 123456789 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 75 of 147

Thread: D41 Elections and Candidates Part Deux

  1. #61
    Quote Originally Posted by Wm. Schumacher View Post
    Nature abhors a vacuum. You are a member of several social media groups in which there was speculation about the odd meeting date and time. When you know the facts, and see such speculation, feel free to respond and share your information. It’s human nature to read meaning into silence; Ultimately (as with the questions over the survey validity, which took nearly 10 days and an escalation of commenting to elicit a response), the best course is to address such questions when they first crop up (colloquially known as “nipping it in the bud...”), to stop them from growing out of control.
    William - I was never contacted about the meeting day being on MLK. Never. Maybe it was posted on social media, but if it was I didn't see it. I can assure you if I did I would have addressed it as the answer was simple. I do try to be responsive to actual questions.

    Also, my suggestion to you and anyone else, if you have a concern or question that you would like addressed by the BOE, you should be emailing all of us. You can't assume that because it's on social media we are all seeing it. Our emails found here: https://www.d41.org/domain/33

    You bring up the survey. Again. You didn't like the questions or answers on the survey (that's what you emailed me about - and you are one of only three people who have emailed me about the survey). Others didn't like the functionality and were posting that on social media. I was responsive and provided the feedback to the search firm. They didn't feel it was necessary to change our survey. I have confidence in their decision. What more can I say beyond that? To me it seemed that unless I demanded the search firm change their search tool, you and others would not be satisfied.

  2. #62
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Posts
    157
    Quote Originally Posted by Wm. Schumacher View Post
    Nature abhors a vacuum. You are a member of several social media groups in which there was speculation about the odd meeting date and time. When you know the facts, and see such speculation, feel free to respond and share your information. It’s human nature to read meaning into silence; Ultimately (as with the questions over the survey validity, which took nearly 10 days and an escalation of commenting to elicit a response), the best course is to address such questions when they first crop up (colloquially known as “nipping it in the bud...”), to stop them from growing out of control.
    Shu, Admin can restore deleted posts if you ask nicely. Then everyone can see what you wrote and judge for themselves.

  3. #63
    Quote Originally Posted by Stephanie Clark View Post
    William - I was never contacted about the meeting day being on MLK. Never. Maybe it was posted on social media, but if it was I didn't see it. I can assure you if I did I would have addressed it as the answer was simple. I do try to be responsive to actual questions.
    I should clarify when I said no one had contacted me, I talking about BEFORE GE Love posted on the forum a few days ago. Mr. Schumacher insinuated the question had been asked prior to that and I had ignored it so it was necessary for the distasteful post from GE Love in order for me to answer. Not true.

  4. #64
    Administrator Clamato's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    4,030
    Quote Originally Posted by Stephen View Post
    Shu, Admin can restore deleted posts if you ask nicely. Then everyone can see what you wrote and judge for themselves.
    I read it. SHOCKING!*









    *attempting to drive more page views.

  5. #65
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Posts
    489
    Quote Originally Posted by jombl View Post
    B.S.
    Jombl - You are the one actively continuing down this inflammatory, erroneous path. Shu and I have said our mea culpas and deleted posts. If you need a pound of flesh, there is most certainly plenty of that to go around.

  6. #66
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Posts
    489
    Quote Originally Posted by Stephanie Clark View Post
    I should clarify when I said no one had contacted me, I talking about BEFORE GE Love posted on the forum a few days ago. Mr. Schumacher insinuated the question had been asked prior to that and I had ignored it so it was necessary for the distasteful post from GE Love in order for me to answer. Not true.
    Mr. Schumacher insinuated that there have been many occasions when requests for info have gone unanswered (I would agree). I would agree with your above statement that we should not post questions here and expect that you are paying attention, rather to e-mail you directly. I disagree wholeheartedly with most of yours and Buchholz's representation of us on the School Board. I assume we will have to disagree and await the outcome of April elections.

  7. #67
    I'll go ahead and post this again:

    Quote Originally Posted by GE Love View Post
    I have taken the hit for the MLK statement. Although it garnered a response to a question that probably would have gone unanswered otherwise, the ends most certainly do not justify the means. I deleted the post and thanked them for setting the record straight. This does not diminish the multitude of questionable actions by Clarkhholz that need to be addressed.
    So you wanted to know why the Board meeting was on the day that it was. Why would that question go unanswered?

    Also, I'm happy to address the questionable actions if you would like to share them.

    I'll add to that request the list of questions that you have that have gone unanswered. Not promising I can answer them, but I'd like to know what you and Mr. Schumacher are talking about. Thanks in advance.

  8. #68
    Forum Regular Wm. Schumacher's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Glen Ellyn
    Posts
    405

    D41 Elections and Candidates Part Deux

    Quote Originally Posted by Stephanie Clark View Post
    Maybe it was posted on social media, but if it was I didn't see it. I can assure you if I did I would have addressed it as the answer was simple. I do try to be responsive to actual questions.

    Also, my suggestion to you and anyone else, if you have a concern or question that you would like addressed by the BOE, you should be emailing all of us. You can't assume that because it's on social media we are all seeing it. Our emails found here: https://www.d41.org/domain/33

    You bring up the survey. Again. You didn't like the questions or answers on the survey (that's what you emailed me about - and you are one of only three people who have emailed me about the survey). Others didn't like the functionality and were posting that on social media. I was responsive and provided the feedback to the search firm. They didn't feel it was necessary to change our survey. I have confidence in their decision. What more can I say beyond that? To me it seemed that unless I demanded the search firm change their search tool, you and others would not be satisfied.
    First, I find it hard to believe that you don’t pay attention to social media, or that few were concerned with the functionality of the survey beyond the ones who emailed you. It was brought up at the Board Meeting the next day. If you had indeed contacted BWP right away, and they told you nothing could be done, then - taking you at your word - why not communicate that back to us?

    I say “taking you at your word,” because I posted about the functionality a number of times on social media. On numerous pages. Fairly straightforward posts that explained that you apparently could submit more than the requested number of answers, and submit completed surveys as many times as you wanted. If no one has ever commented to BWP about this being a flaw (and it is; it’s “Survey Writing 101” - “No one should have more of a voice than anyone else.”), then either I’m a genius, or they’re inept, or both. These posts were on District Parent Group pages; they weren’t hidden. When I finally compared our survey to Downers Grove’s, ten days later (and posted what - in the void - looked like pretty damning evidence), your first answer was that the board hadn’t had any input, and that you’d pass this on to them.

    Your edited answer some minutes later was amended to say you had contacted them, and that you weren’t sure, but maybe they had corrected it on Downers’ Survey?

    Your third answer was that you had contacted them, it was too late to make the change, and that no one had complained before, but they added it to the Downers’ Survey before it launched.

    So something doesn’t add up. If you had contacted them after the board meeting, when did you learn that they couldn’t change it? Or that no one had complained about that before? Or that they definitely had added it to the Downer’s Survey because of your comments? And when you discovered this information, why did it take a week or more to communicate this info?

    So, I go to the phrase “I do try to be responsive to actual questions.” Social media, therefore is out. Although many people were complaining about the survey, because you hadn’t been specifically asked, you didn’t feel a need to comment. Like the faulty survey, you turned it around and put it on the fault-finders: it’s simple - Just follow the rules and there won’t be any problems at all. So all along, when people posted on the Forum, or on the D41 Parents’ Page, or on the Glen Ellyn Schools Page, you didn’t take those seriously, as no one had specifically asked you a question - emails preferred.

    I suggest you keep an eye on social media, and not wait for community interaction to neatly email you specific questions. As a board member once put it: “We don’t have to wait for the community to demand it, it’s what leadership does; it engages.”







    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Last edited by Wm. Schumacher; 02-22-2019 at 06:30 PM.

  9. #69
    Forum Regular Wm. Schumacher's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Glen Ellyn
    Posts
    405
    Quote Originally Posted by jombl View Post
    You actively engaged in pushing the Bruno candidates political effort to cast your political opponents as racists.
    Tell me which of the “Bruno Candidates” is casting political opponents as racist? Until then, with all due respect, go away little man (or woman...).


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  10. #70
    Forum Regular mamattorney's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    470
    William, I don't understand what's happening here.

    I have a question that I think you may know the answer to. I posted that question on a social media group I belong to.

    Why haven't you answered me?

    ETA: I guess I could have reached out to you directly. Maybe that would have helped you see my question and work on answering it. Nah... I'll just continue to be annoyed that you haven't responded to my post to my group.

  11. #71
    Quote Originally Posted by Wm. Schumacher View Post
    First, I find it hard to believe that you don’t pay attention to social media, or that few were concerned with the functionality of the survey beyond the ones who emailed you. It was brought up at the Board Meeting the next day. If you had indeed contacted BWP right away, and they told you nothing could be done, then - taking you at your word - why not communicate that back to us?

    I say “taking you at your word,” because I posted about the functionality a number of times on social media. On numerous pages. Fairly straightforward posts that explained that you apparently could submit more than the requested number of answers, and submit completed surveys as many times as you wanted. If no one has ever commented to BWP about this being a flaw (and it is; it’s “Survey Writing 101” - “No one should have more of a voice than anyone else.”), then either I’m a genius, or they’re inept, or both. These posts were on District Parent Group pages; they weren’t hidden. When I finally compared our survey to Downers Grove’s, ten days later (and posted what - in the void - looked like pretty damning evidence), your first answer was that the board hadn’t had any input, and that you’d pass this on to them.

    Your edited answer some minutes later was amended to say you had contacted them, and that you weren’t sure, but maybe they had corrected it on Downers’ Survey?

    Your third answer was that you had contacted them, it was too late to make the change, and that no one had complained before, but they added it to the Downers’ Survey before it launched.

    So something doesn’t add up. If you had contacted them after the board meeting, when did you learn that they couldn’t change it? Or that no one had complained about that before? Or that they definitely had added it to the Downer’s Survey because of your comments? And when you discovered this information, why did it take a week or more to communicate this info?

    So, I go to the phrase “I do try to be responsive to actual questions.” Social media, therefore is out. Although many people were complaining about the survey, because you hadn’t been specifically asked, you didn’t feel a need to comment. Like the faulty survey, you turned it around and put it on the fault-finders: it’s simple - Just follow the rules and there won’t be any problems at all. So all along, when people posted on the Forum, or on the D41 Parents’ Page, or on the Glen Ellyn Schools Page, you didn’t take those seriously, as no one had specifically asked you a question - emails preferred.

    I suggest you keep an eye on social media, and not wait for community interaction to neatly email you specific questions. As a board member once put it: “We don’t have to wait for the community to demand it, it’s what leadership does; it engages.”







    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Dude. Take a break. No offense but the play by play makes you sound like a stalker. She answered you. Move on.

  12. #72
    Forum Regular Wm. Schumacher's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Glen Ellyn
    Posts
    405

    D41 Elections and Candidates Part Deux

    Quote Originally Posted by mamattorney View Post
    William, I don't understand what's happening here.

    I have a question that I think you may know the answer to. I posted that question on a social media group I belong to.

    Why haven't you answered me?

    ETA: I guess I could have reached out to you directly. Maybe that would have helped you see my question and work on answering it. Nah... I'll just continue to be annoyed that you haven't responded to my post to my group.
    You realize you and Stephanie are both responding on “one of the social media groups I belong to,” and on which, ten days ago, I started an entire thread (with 59 replies) on the subject of the survey?

    If you are impugning this Forum by implying it is a deserted echo chamber, where nothing within its boundaries ever reaches the light of the outside world...well, you’ll have to reach out to Clamato directly.


    https://r.tapatalk.com/shareLink?sha...1&share_type=t


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Last edited by Wm. Schumacher; 02-22-2019 at 09:37 PM.

  13. #73
    Administrator Clamato's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    4,030
    I think there may be some truth in the beating-a-dead-horse observation. I believe it is understood that there are some who do not like Ms. Clark nor Mr. Buchholz, and it has been duly noted.

    Not certain why this makes their opponents competent enough to hold the position, but I get it. They are not liked. I guess the assumed leader of the opponent group can use that as her top qualification. Come to think of it, that tack will work for me in the fall of 2020 with whomever runs against Trump. Unless it's Sanders. Don't think we need that. Praying for a strong GOP primary.

  14. #74
    Acolyte Jester Country Watchhog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Location
    Illinoise
    Posts
    74
    Quote Originally Posted by Clamato View Post
    I think there may be some truth in the beating-a-dead-horse observation. I believe it is understood that there are some who do not like Ms. Clark nor Mr. Buchholz, and it has been duly noted.

    Not certain why this makes their opponents competent enough to hold the position, but I get it. They are not liked. I guess the assumed leader of the opponent group can use that as her top qualification. Come to think of it, that tack will work for me in the fall of 2020 with whomever runs against Trump. Unless it's Sanders. Don't think we need that. Praying for a strong GOP primary.
    .......

    Quote Originally Posted by admin View Post
    ...using that thread as a surrogate to take shots at national politics, which as you know, we've gottten away from here.

  15. #75
    Administrator Clamato's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    4,030
    Quote Originally Posted by Jester Country Watchhog View Post
    .......
    Simply a comparison. And an accurate comparison.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •