In his editorial for Wednesday's Herald, Tom Dennis includes several comments from local bloggers. The subject of Dennis' editorial is the culmination of the lengthy debate over where to place a dog park in Grand Forks. The editorial lays out two arguments made over at Tu-Uyen's blog. Commenter People in GF Hate Change criticizes the way the dog park has been debated and handled. On the other hand, yours truly, GrandForksGuy, praises the long but fair process that has taken place. Tom calls mine "the stronger argument." I really appreciate that. Thanks, Tom! I also appreciate the mention of my blog and its address.
My full comment:
You know one thing that I like about the way this dog park thing played out? The fact that, in the end, no one was ultimately able to force their particular plans or agenda without taking into consideration the opposite side of the argument. Some dog park proponents would have wanted any dog park plan regardless of what kind of an impact that plan would have had on the neighborhood or city. On the other hand, some dog park opponents would have been happy if the whole dog park thing had just gone away and no park had been built. In the end, both camps had to make concessions and revise their plans - no one side was able to force their agenda down the other side's throats. I think it's a good thing when an issue has to be weighed and debated and when ALL sides have to be given the ability to be heard. In the end, that is what occurred and we are left with a decent plan that satisfies almost everyone. To me, that's not such a bad way to handle a controversial issue.
Posted by: GrandForksGuy on 7/17/2007 6:36 PM