You must be logged in to comment on this page. Please log in.

2007-05-05 11:19:43   hey david. thanks for adding stuff to the peoples vanguard of davis page. —JessicaRockwell

2007-05-05 14:02:25   No problem. A lot changes coming with the Vanguard in the next month or so... —DavidGreenwald

2007-05-05 23:54:06   The Davisites thank you for your bloggage. I for one hear of an issue or two that you touch upon on the vanguard thru mien pops. —StevenDaubert

2007-06-06 01:45:17   yo yo yo. nice seeing you out there today. —JessicaRockwell

2008-10-01 19:10:03   What do you think about the proposed charter? —StevenDaubert

2009-09-16 13:37:48   The rumor mill told me that you and Cecilia are going to kick butt together as the ticket in the next city election... Confirm / Deny ? —StevenDaubert

2010-06-03 16:27:08   A good solution might be take a couple passes over a few weeks, but your responses shouldn't intentionally be deleted. Occasionally in refactoring stuff is lost, but the intent is to keep the salient points and views. —JabberWokky

2010-06-04 14:43:57   Heh I actually just searched the Vanguard for noise ordinance stories, and was about to leave you a message seeing if you knew the latest :) —TomGarberson

2010-06-08 21:19:44   Don has said that no charges of racism — including honest accusations of racism with specifics — should be on the wiki because they are negative and impossible to prove. It's that stance that I took issue with. Otherwise, I agree with removing comments that claim racism without specific cited reasons to back the claim (something I've tried to make clear throughout this). —JabberWokky

  • As an addendum, Don points out that I'm slightly off on characterizing his position (see his comment on my editor entry). He holds that "honest" is a meaningless distinction as it can not be proven. I believe that his position would then be that any accusation of racism, even with specifics, has no place on the wiki. That would still cover the Buzayan case to the best of my knowledge. Of course, you're asking my reason for an action based on somebody else's position, so I absolutely and emphatically yield to any clarification that Don makes, although my response was obviously based on my perception of his position. I gathered what I know of his position from specific questions that I asked on the Talk page for Strelitzia Flower Co in order to clarify his views so that I could understand them. -jw
    • My posted comment about accusations of racism on the Davis Wiki; if I were writing policy here "...if it is provable or falsifiable, it can remain. If it is in the public domain (Buzayan case), it can remain just on that basis alone (it’s a story) even if not yet proven or falsified. If someone is willing to stake their reputation on the accusation, it can remain; this means establishing identity. If you wish to come up with some way of allowing anonymous accusations to remain long enough to be validated by others, please propose it. That is why I left the whole Strelitzia issue alone for a few days after an editor replied asking for clarification. But understand that as long as the accusation stands, it is doing harm. Businesses should be treated with the same respect you would expect yourself and that you would apply to individuals. An anonymous, vague accusation that can’t be proven or falsified really should not be allowed." —DonShor

2010-06-10 17:19:21   David, I noticed that you said on your blog the other day something about the write-in votes not being counted in the races where people were running unopposed. Have you been able to find out anything more about that? I am curious because I did a write-in for one of the races, so it bothers me to see the candidate get "100%." —CovertProfessor

2010-06-10 17:36:28   Ah, ok — thank you. I am not that fired up about it that I'd pursue a change in the state law, i.e., I don't suspect that a write-in candidate actually won. I'm more just curious as to how many others like me there may have been — how much support this person actually got (or in this case, didn't get). Anyway, I will look forward to your analysis tomorrow. —CovertProfessor

2010-06-15 17:03:18   ♥ You are correct —StevenDaubert

2010-08-09 18:44:14   Hi David - If you have any specific edits you'd like to make to the Tandem Properties page, then please do so on the talk page... that's why I created it, to hash out any controversial matters before it gets published. My relationship with Tandem is relatively unimportant; it is the content that matters. Some loose guidelines on how it all works can be found here: .

I spend a fair amount of time on the wiki. While I'm by no means a dedicated gnome, I try and help when and where I can. As with many folks in Davis, my responsibilities and duties to different organizations often overlap. If you have specific concerns with any of my past or future edits, please leave me a note and I'd be happy to work toward a solution. —KemblePope