by Matt Williams
Recently the topic of anonymity and the Vanguard has been discussed from a number of perspectives. There is no easy answer to this issue, but regardless of what one’s opinion is of whether or not anonymous posters should be allowed on the Vanguard, I think most everybody would agree that anonymity does come with certain associated realities, and those realities either come with, or point to, certain responsibilities that impact all the Vanguard’s readers.
For example, early in March I submitted the eleven questions quoted below to Mayor Dan Wolk at his Morning with the Mayor at Common Grounds. Dan had a full complement of citizens there with their own questions, and as I noted in the original Vanguard thread soliciting questions for the Mayor, since I was acting as a proxy for those who could not be there (or chose to not be there), I would wait until all the first-hand questions were answered. As a result Dan only had time to accept the questions and take them under advisement for later answering, either in a future Mayors Corner article in the Enterprise and Vanguard, or by the Council as a whole (since some of the submitted questions really were for the whole Council, not just the mayor as an individual).
In follow-up discussions with the Mayor, he raised the concern that all the questions (with one exception) were submitted by anonymous Vanguard commenters. He expressed a strong desire to receive the questions, either through direct e-mail to him or other means of the submitter’s choice, from citizens who felt the question(s) they were submitting were important enough to the Davis community that they would attach their actual name to the question. That request by the Mayor is one of the realities that I referred to in my first paragraph above. The responsibilities part comes for Vanguard readers in acting on that reality, and either submitting one or more questions (either from the ones below, or ones that you personally have) directly to him, or by attaching (here in the Vanguard) non-anonymous names to one or more of the questions listed below.
• What is the procedure for enrolling children in the summer Parks and Rec programs? Do City of Davis employees, and their friends and family members, still get first choice?
• When do you anticipate addressing the issue of roads and infrastructure?
• Do you think the city is economically viable without adding innovation parks, the hotel conference center, and/or Nishi?
• Since you are concerned with pricing families out of Davis, do you anticipate adding either housing, workforce housing, or affordable housing in the near future?
• Would you support mixed use at the innovation parks?
• Do you anticipate raising salaries for employees between now and the end of your term as Mayor?
• Will you actively support extending the joint management of the Davis and UCD fire departments?
• Are you concerned about the 0.3% apartment vacancy rate, and, if so, what the current council might be doing to address that?
• I would like our City Council members to take the time to explain their thoughts on the CFD. Especially how providing $12 million to the developer is in the best interest of the city. Looking at our roads I wonder how $12 million might address the condition of our roads?
• Do our City Council members think that the CFD will impact the new residents of the Cannery project when voting on parcel taxes? Much of what Davis provides to its citizens is included in the parcel taxes.
• Has the City considered selling the DACHA homes so the State, City and DJUSD would start getting property tax and parcel tax revenue from them (because city, state and UC owned property does not pay property taxes or parcel taxes)…
Was it the anonymity or the fact that the questions are tough and hard hitting? I can see where Dan Wolk might want to dodge some of those questions. What difference is it if a name is attached if the question is good and appropriate?
BP, when Dan and I used the few remaining minutes of that Friday Morning With the Mayor, he read the questions, and said spontaneously after reading them, “These are all really good questions.” He then expressed his concern about anonymity, followed by his suggestion that receiving them directly in his e-mail or from non-anonymous posters would very quickly and effectively eliminate the anonymous submission issue. I did not get the sense that he was trying to avoid any of the questions. My interactions with him since then have given me no reason to doubt the accuracy of my initial feelings.
So, Barack, let’s just take one question… “• Do you anticipate raising salaries for employees between now and the end of your term as Mayor?”
Ok, now put yourself in his “shoes” (as I will)… if the question was asked by an anonymous poster, what would you/he/I, think the ‘asker’ meant by “salary”, whether they meant ‘salary’ or ‘total comp’ (inc. medical, etc)? How would you/he/I know if you were asking for your/HIS/my view, about you/HE/I plans to vote during the rest of your/his/my term, or your/his/my prognostication of how a majority of the CC will vote during the remaining portion of his term? Is, the ‘asker’ asking for a “yes”/”no” on either/all of the previous questions, or, is “maybe/depends” responsive? I know I’d want to ask some clarifying questions before I answered, for the record, what I believe to be an ambiguous question. To do that, I’d have to contact/interact with the ‘asker’. Which I probably can’t, if the asker is anonymous.
Just for myself, irregardless of whether I agreed with the asker’s view (either someone who wanted to cut all employee compensation by 25%, or a city employee who felt they deserved a 25 % raise) or not, I’d not answer the question for the record, in a concrete way, until I understood the nuances. It is, in my opinion, an ambiguous question.
>> What difference is it if a name is attached if the question is good and appropriate? <<
Hmm. This would be a good and appropriate question if your name were attached. But alas…
Hmmm….. That’s the point, it is a good and appropriate question and my name isn’t attached.
I’m not saying that I agree with this perspective, but one argument is that it is about process. I can easily imagine a non-anonymous person (who takes the time and commitment to submit a question) questioning why their electeds are answering questions from people who aren’t even part of the Davis community, while at the same time not having the time to answer questions from citizens who have clearly demonstrated that they actually are members of the Davis community.
To cite an example, there have been numerous times when I have been excoriated by posters here in the Vanguard for having the audacity to weigh in on City of Davis issues. Why? Their answer to that question at the time was that I did not live within the City Limits, and therefore was disenfranchised. That argument never held water with me, but it resonated with some other people. The “process argument” is that there is no way to KNOW whether anonymous posters actually are “franchised” Davis residents.
I propose new legislation that prevents discrimination of avatars and pseudonyms. I am sensing some troubling hate and it needs to stop.
Avatars have feelings too.
Mine is growing hypersensitive to the disrespect being demonstrated.
How about we just consider it a temporary name change?
Behind every avatar and pseudonym is a real feeling human being.
Agree with BP, like corporations, avatars are people, too.
;>)/
Yes, and they both pay taxes and so they both deserve representation.
“Yes, and they both pay taxes and so they both deserve representation.”
Perhaps, but can the death penalty be administered to a corporation when it commits murder? If so, what does the firing squad aim at? Oink!
Napoleon… all assets of the corporation, including any pensions, etc. that they have control over, 100% taxation of CEO’s, CFO’s, etc. THAT would be the ‘death penalty’. Oink, oink.
Sure they can. Government kills corporations all the time for all sorts of reasons, including the reason that government just wanted to kill the corporation.
Corporations can also be killed by mob action without being protected by government. Or in many cases the government assists the mob because politicians like to make friends with the mob.
And the officers of bad actor corporations do hard time just like REAL people.
Generally the firing squad takes aim at the lifeblood of the corporation… the assets that it has earned.
Frankly
“I am sensing some troubling hate and it needs to stop.”
It is clear that you are being hypersensitive. And that needs to stop ; )
I’m just trying out hypersensitivity. It feels good.
Cool, he’s going to answer my question!
A question about a question? Too funny.
“when do think you will want to anticipate wanting a chocolate bar”? Sure!
This “anonymity” topic reminds me of the recent piece by the DJUSD Superintendent where he wanted to run an article basically asking for more taxes, but not have any comments from the readers. I found that very odd.
Why “odd”? Do you not see TV, listen to radio, observe billboards? Read magazines, newspapers? It’s called “advertising”, infomercials, ‘media-outreach’, etc. In his position, could visualize myself doing the same.