Comments on: Local Church Services State For Free http://www.fullertonsfuture.org/2009/local-church-services-state-for-free/ Friends for Fullerton's Future supports candidates and causes that promote intelligent, responsible and accountable government in Fullerton and Orange County Fri, 12 Mar 2010 21:37:03 -0800 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: JC http://www.fullertonsfuture.org/2009/local-church-services-state-for-free/#comment-7173 JC Sun, 22 Nov 2009 06:09:44 +0000 http://www.friendsforfullertonsfuture.org/?p=8152#comment-7173 The email I wrote asking about party affiliations. though as The Harpoon pointed out there is a checkbox for anonymity, so I apologize for my poor memory. The email I wrote asking about party affiliations. though as The Harpoon pointed out there is a checkbox for anonymity, so I apologize for my poor memory.

]]> By: admin http://www.fullertonsfuture.org/2009/local-church-services-state-for-free/#comment-7164 admin Sun, 22 Nov 2009 02:01:41 +0000 http://www.friendsforfullertonsfuture.org/?p=8152#comment-7164 JC, please remind me what it was of yours I published that you sent to me via email. JC, please remind me what it was of yours I published that you sent to me via email.

]]> By: JC http://www.fullertonsfuture.org/2009/local-church-services-state-for-free/#comment-7157 JC Sat, 21 Nov 2009 22:13:24 +0000 http://www.friendsforfullertonsfuture.org/?p=8152#comment-7157 So there is, I stand corrected. So there is, I stand corrected.

]]> By: The Fullerton Harpoon http://www.fullertonsfuture.org/2009/local-church-services-state-for-free/#comment-7156 The Fullerton Harpoon Sat, 21 Nov 2009 21:59:31 +0000 http://www.friendsforfullertonsfuture.org/?p=8152#comment-7156 <blockquote cite="#commentbody-7154"> <strong><a href="#comment-7154" rel="nofollow">JC</a> :</strong><P>Well it’s interesting that you claim not to be journalists.</P> <P>I think that at the very least you should mention on the contact form that any questions or comments sent via email are not considered private communication.</P></blockquote> I really have no idea what a "journalist" is but I know that I am not one. I believe our form does has a place to request anonymity; as for publishing your thoughts (without attribution), I don't know what the objection is: if you've made a good point others may profit from it.

JC :

Well it’s interesting that you claim not to be journalists.

I think that at the very least you should mention on the contact form that any questions or comments sent via email are not considered private communication.

I really have no idea what a “journalist” is but I know that I am not one. I believe our form does has a place to request anonymity; as for publishing your thoughts (without attribution), I don’t know what the objection is: if you’ve made a good point others may profit from it.

]]> By: JC http://www.fullertonsfuture.org/2009/local-church-services-state-for-free/#comment-7154 JC Sat, 21 Nov 2009 21:42:12 +0000 http://www.friendsforfullertonsfuture.org/?p=8152#comment-7154 Well it's interesting that you claim not to be journalists. I think that at the very least you should mention on the contact form that any questions or comments sent via email are not considered private communication. Well it’s interesting that you claim not to be journalists.

I think that at the very least you should mention on the contact form that any questions or comments sent via email are not considered private communication.

]]> By: Anonymous http://www.fullertonsfuture.org/2009/local-church-services-state-for-free/#comment-7005 Anonymous Wed, 18 Nov 2009 06:34:44 +0000 http://www.friendsforfullertonsfuture.org/?p=8152#comment-7005 Get rid of the extraneous, repetitive phrasing. Shorten your sentences. If you can't say it in 600 words or less, then go back and edit for clarity. Get rid of the extraneous, repetitive phrasing. Shorten your sentences. If you can’t say it in 600 words or less, then go back and edit for clarity.

]]> By: The Fullerton Harpoon http://www.fullertonsfuture.org/2009/local-church-services-state-for-free/#comment-6918 The Fullerton Harpoon Mon, 16 Nov 2009 15:02:52 +0000 http://www.friendsforfullertonsfuture.org/?p=8152#comment-6918 JC, you can forget the "journalistic integrity" thing since we are not journalists. We actually get a lot e-mails from people some of whom seem to think we are some sort of Dear Abby. Others specifically ask that their identities be protected - and we have done that. The problem of one-on-one communication is obvious. We've done it in the past to ferret out an engaging issue. If you don't want your thoughts published then please say so. JC, you can forget the “journalistic integrity” thing since we are not journalists. We actually get a lot e-mails from people some of whom seem to think we are some sort of Dear Abby. Others specifically ask that their identities be protected – and we have done that.

The problem of one-on-one communication is obvious. We’ve done it in the past to ferret out an engaging issue. If you don’t want your thoughts published then please say so.

]]> By: JC http://www.fullertonsfuture.org/2009/local-church-services-state-for-free/#comment-6912 JC Mon, 16 Nov 2009 06:56:27 +0000 http://www.friendsforfullertonsfuture.org/?p=8152#comment-6912 Admin, I think the bigger issue is that you should review your publishing guidelines. I previously wrote a letter expecting an individual reply that ended up being posted, and now I'm seeing a second example of the same, who knows how many others got more than expected. Or maybe it's only me that thinks journalistic integrity should default to off the record. Admin,

I think the bigger issue is that you should review your publishing guidelines. I previously wrote a letter expecting an individual reply that ended up being posted, and now I’m seeing a second example of the same, who knows how many others got more than expected.

Or maybe it’s only me that thinks journalistic integrity should default to off the record.

]]> By: JC http://www.fullertonsfuture.org/2009/local-church-services-state-for-free/#comment-6911 JC Mon, 16 Nov 2009 06:51:59 +0000 http://www.friendsforfullertonsfuture.org/?p=8152#comment-6911 Actually I should shut up, if you feel you should reply to my latest reply feel free to do so, but I won't proceed. As you said this was not meant to be a public letter and I apologize for dragging it out. I also had an email to the admin publicly displayed when all I was asking was a private response. I'm sorry for going to that extreme. Once again, sorry that I contributed to making it bigger than you were aiming for. JC Actually I should shut up, if you feel you should reply to my latest reply feel free to do so, but I won’t proceed. As you said this was not meant to be a public letter and I apologize for dragging it out.

I also had an email to the admin publicly displayed when all I was asking was a private response. I’m sorry for going to that extreme.

Once again, sorry that I contributed to making it bigger than you were aiming for.

JC

]]> By: JC http://www.fullertonsfuture.org/2009/local-church-services-state-for-free/#comment-6910 JC Mon, 16 Nov 2009 06:44:30 +0000 http://www.friendsforfullertonsfuture.org/?p=8152#comment-6910 Though, according to the supreme court, government sponsorship of a religion is implied by funding or a government employee leading a prayer. Or allowing government land to be used to promote one religion over another. As I said this has nothing to do with the first amendment, but to claim that sponsorship is not the same as establishment is foolish in the face of the rulings on the matter. I'm glad that you agree that the government shouldn't establish a state religion, but I'd hope that you realize that that can be done implicitly as well as explicitly though you seem to think the establishment clause only applies to the latter. Though, according to the supreme court, government sponsorship of a religion is implied by funding or a government employee leading a prayer. Or allowing government land to be used to promote one religion over another.

As I said this has nothing to do with the first amendment, but to claim that sponsorship is not the same as establishment is foolish in the face of the rulings on the matter.

I’m glad that you agree that the government shouldn’t establish a state religion, but I’d hope that you realize that that can be done implicitly as well as explicitly though you seem to think the establishment clause only applies to the latter.

]]>