For the second time in as many months Dr. Scott Clay, EMSD#63’s Superintendent has chosen to cease communication directly with this blog site. Says it’s not in the districts interest. The experiment has come to an end. We have found out how much confrontational-stretch the district can take. On June 23rd I published What was the EMSD#63 Board Thinking? A asked at the end: “Was this experiment in open communication dumb or brilliant?”
Time for you to make the call!
Dr. Clay has chosen to continue blogging from the safety of the district’s blog site: http://emsd63.edublogs.org/. Although you will not find confrontation there, you will be able to read EMSD#63’s latest PR.
Dr. Clay is welcome here whenever he wishes!
8 comments:
Mr. Butterly,
You need to reread my past responses carefully. I have never said I was “calling it quits” nor that I would not be responding to your blog ever again. What I did say, was “I believe it is now in the best interest of our district that I restrict my responses to your blog.” That was the only time I indicated I would be limiting my responses on here. Please, in the interest of honest dialogue, set the record straight with your readers.
I have made it clear that I welcome debate in regard to what I believe is in the best interest of our students and our school district. I don't believe it is good use of my time as superintendent to get into debates where the discussion has strayed to things like NAFTA, your suggestion that I should negotiate with foreign governments to set up teacher recruitment opportunities, or the distance from here to Mexico City. Those things have nothing to do with the challenges we face in this district. I will continue to interact in debates that are focused on the actual issues.
Also, thank you for listing the link to our blog in your last post. I do appreciate the effort.
Sincerely,
Dr. Clay
WOW!!! I just clicked on your blog Mr. Clay and not one person has left a comments on your blog. I wonder why? Could it be that the EMSD#63 Board and Administrators are not trusted by the public? Me thinks so.
Dr. Scott Clay, Superintendent
July 22, 2010 2:31 PM wrote:
"I believe it is now in the best interest of our district that I restrict my responses to your blog. Originally, I believed that addressing your individual concerns would open up a valuable dialogue; however I now believe that such a discussion has limited value...."
"... My blog, at emsd63.edublogs.org, will continue to be used to communicate and hopefully interact with our community. You and your readers are welcome to address your concerns there or with me in person."
Seems to me like he was quitting!
8:05:
So we judge a blog on traffic?? This blog started in 2007. It would appear there was so much interest that even the person running it disappeared for a few years. If you look at the total number of posts that were generated by this guys writing on this blog it is less than 100. Less that 100 people even posted for 55 "essays", or should I say opinions of a clearly slanted (even bitter) man. If you back out Clay's posts and the blog owners replies to various posts you are probably at about 50!!! 50 posts on 55 writings since 2007. Hell, I have posted about 4-5 times!! I represent 10% of the posts!! I bet if you break it down by how many unique people have posted on this blog it is about 5!!! What a joke!!
Anon: July 30, 2010 6:15 AM,
Thank you for your comments about my blog site although the comments were not directly made to me. I now know for sure that I am succeeding because, by your own words, you’ve shown up here - again. Let me explain.
You came. You saw. You commented. You returned!
That is the reason for producing a blog. I’m sure you’ll agree most readers never feel the want or need to leave a comment as you have today. Your comment made it clear that you’re standard for gauging a blog’s success are the number of reader comments generated. That is a standard and one that I would use along with the total number of hits or even the daily hit rate, if this were a commercial venture. This is not a commercial venture however, and my goal and my standard are quite different.
My standard for success is this: I am only interested in who reads this blog.
You are here. It appears by your comment that you’ve read everything that I’ve written since 2007, and in spite of what you’ve read, you’ve returned.
You fit my standard. You represent my success!
As to your comment that my opinions are “clearly slanted” I agree. I have a slant, so do you. Everyone has a slant! As to my being a “bitter” man, I don’t get it. Maybe you would like to come back here and flesh out that comment a little so that I can adequately respond.
Thank you again for continuing to support my site with your presence and for expressing yourself so eloquently.
Mr. Butterly:
Your response shows your lack of seeing a fairly obvious point and/or your desire to twist facts. It is not I that uses the number of comments as a standard.
If you read my post it very clearly directs the comments to 8:05. The first line of my post states "So we judge a blog on traffic?" It cannot be anymore clear than that!!! If you read the comment by 8:05, it very clearly defines number of comments as a measurement. In fact, 8:05 goes so far as to equate lack of comments with a lack of trust (does that apply to you?). It was his/her post that I was responsing to.
You are showing your true colors by responding to my post, yet feeling no need to respond to 8:05. Apparently it is OK if people use flawed logic so long as they target those you are against.
Anon: July 30, 2010 10:35 AM,
You’ve made my point again!
Thank you.
Anon: July 29, 2010 8:05 PM,
I went to the District's blog site and there were no comments. I guess you were right, no takers. As to your comments about trust, I think those familiar with EMSD#63 actives can make up their own mind.
Post a Comment