I'll be stepping in, and hope to do a respectable job of filling his shoes.
You're absolutely invited to email me directly with any ideas or suggestions. I'm all ears.
In the meantime, I was intrigued to discover that, according to Google, more than half of the pageviews for the blog are coming from Japan. Who knew?
Barry Rueger
Entry............................... Pageviews
Japan................................ 611
Canada............................. 275
United States.................... 107
Germany............................ 56
China................................ 28
Portugal............................ 26
Moldova........................... 21
France.............................. 15
Russia.............................. 15
Ukraine.............................. 6
34 comments:
Only on the job a short time and presenting interesting stuff Barry.
Japan.. who knew!!?!!
Interesting to know, if you can decipher, WHO or what in Japan is hitting on this site.
Is it a North Van expat, a bot, or..??
In your lap Barry and thanks for taking up the torch.
And thanks to John for carrying it these past years.
We don't have to agree on everything to still be civil.
I remember when Barry Forward started the blog in late 2004 I believe. It was a going concern during the 2005 municipal elections. Ernie Crist commented and posted regularly under his own name.
Good luck Barry, perhaps we can learn some lessons on how to manage a political blog.
I wonder if the page views in Japan don't come from the area of Chiba-Shi which is a twin city to North Vancouver?
Actually the blog was a "going concern" for several years after the election of 2005. Many local politicians and VIPs viewed the blog regularly, but it seemed that as the number anonymous comments grew with perhaps less accountability for what they were saying, the named commenters decreased and finally disappeared almost entirely.
I don't know if it was the anons, I seem to recall some of the named posters were also posting anonymously and having conversations with them selves. One was caught because he accidentally posted a response to himself, speaking fondly of himself, under his own name. Ooops.
I would have to say the local politicians took it more seriously back when Barry Forward interviewed them for blog posts, that added credibility to it. Maybe we should see if any aspiring journalists want to become contributors.
Both Barry Forward and John Sharpe have been fair on this board. It will be a challenge for Barry Rueger not to sabotage any future posts, after one of his more recent outbursts on a certain subject. Sad to see you leave, John.
I recall certain named posters (3 in particular come to mind) who made racial comments, comments on very personal and private matters and generally were horribly disrespectful. In my opinion, given the few named posters and the many anons, and taken as a percentage I think that the anons have done very well.
So is Sharpe gone or is he "taking a break"?
One heads up: posts or comments that amount to cheap shots, personal attacks, or harassment of individuals will be removed, as will whining about the same.
Especially from Anon posters.
Stay on topic, stay polite, show respect.
Does that include people who lie about the good work that Justin Trudeau and the Liberals are doing for this great country, while wallowing around in crocadile tears re the awful taxes they have to pay (they call government spending "their" money) and the apocalypse that the "Liberal" deficit is creating for Canada?
Barry. I take issue with your post stating "Especially from Anon posters." All of the unacceptable behaviour is unacceptable equally and without bias as to who the poster may be.
A fundamental attribute of the blog administrator is unbiased and equal treatment for all participants.
I hope you do not intend to behave as an autocrat to specific populations of posters.
"I wonder if the page views in Japan don't come from the area of Chiba-Shi which is a twin city to North Vancouver?"
No its from my VPN proxy so I can't be tracked.
What are you afraid of?
VPN?
Google it.
Barry cannot manage a blog about North Van Politics.
Why not?
Because he loves walking dogs and the thugs in DNV Hall have told him explicitly, "say one negative word about us and you lose your commercial dog walking license."
The same way CNV and DNA Council have told the Editor of the North Shore News, "write one owrd negative about it, and we pass a bylaw eliminating local newspaper boxes from North Shore sidewalks."
Give him a chance. Why not?
Oh I think he would be ok except that the two North Shore municipal governments use bullying to suppress any dissent or negative publicity etc. Look what municipal hall has done to the people of Lynn Valley for not agreeing to 24-storey towers 3 years ago. Their roads etc mangled to point they are not driveable and now access to the Lynn Headwaters shut off completely. CACs stripped away from developments and spent elsewhere in the DNV. And if anyone so as much as puts their hand up to ask a question, they are at risk of losing that hand.
Proof of your assertions, anon 8:02pm and 9:23am? Enough of the conspiracy theory crap. Prove what you're saying or stop repeating the nonsense. It all makes you sound like you need help.
Anon 11:31
Here is some proof:
Access by car to Lynn Headwaters closed:
http://www.dnv.org/news/lynn-headwaters-access-road-temporarily-closed-effective-december-1-2016
Keith Road bridge, scheduled on October 28, 2016 to open in 2-3 days, now to open some time NEXT SPRING - i.e June 19, 2017. How did 2-3 days become 8 months?
http://www.dnv.org/news/update-new-keith-road-bridge
Lynn Valley bike lanes - DNV report says 87 trees will be removed. Go out and count the stumps. There are well over 200 stumps and the number does not include the 30 trees in the median for which all stumps are gone and at least 100 bushes and shrubs uprooted.
https://www.dnv.org/property-development/lynn-valley-road-bike-lanes
Oh yes, the 13 week project which started 8 weeks ago is about 10% complete.
Please stop denying the self evident and apologizing for such vindictive behaviour by municipal hall. BTW. please name just ONE similar punishment being dealt out to residents east of the Seymour River to Deep Cove - I mean it - name just one.
Project scheduling delays is vindictive punishment? For what? By the way, I'll take cyclist safety over a few trees any day of the week. Give your head a shake and get some sense of reality.
The safest cyclist is one that does not ride on a road.
Spoken like a person who doesn't ride a bike. Without separate bike paths, where are we supposed to ride? I'll give you a hint, the motor vehicle act says the roads.
Because cyclists want to be treated as if riding a vehicle, they need to start obeying the rules of the road. And, because so many cyclists don't, this is where the problems start.
While I was growing up, a cyclist was treated like a pedestrian. They were expected to dismount their bikes and walk across major streets at crosswalks.
Today, you have commuter cyclists riding across several lanes into a left turn lane, which makes things a lot more dangerous and stupid. Cyclists don't stand a chance against an automobile and should be more cautious, but they aren't.
Blah, blah. Go stand on any reasonably busy intersection and watch how many motorists break the rules of the road. Roll through stops, fail to signal, fail to yield to pedestrians. I could go on. ICBC's own statistics show drivers are at fault for the majority of collisions with pedestrians. Automobiles are large and dangerous yet aren't being driven with due care for othe road users. car drivers need to be more careful, slow down, and obey the rules of the road.
For the car drivers:
https://medium.com/@davidmerline/drivers-traffic-laws-were-made-for-you-not-cyclists-worry-about-your-driving-not-their-riding-f330b51ab875#.10admvypd
Anon 10:54- Thank you for clearing up this bit of perceived entitlement of cyclists which clearly does not exist, except in the minds of arrogant cyclists.
Then bikes are just toys, not vehicles! Don't cross over lanes of traffic and expect courtesy from drivers of cars when you cut into a left turn lane. Breaking the rules of the road make it more dangerous for cyclists, not the drivers.
Walk your bike at crosswalks and intersections. Don't pretend you are riding a vehicle with the same rights as those who drive insured cars and hold licenses. Practice some self-preservation, and not play chicken with cars because you feel so entitled to break the rules of the road, and we must all stop on a dime for you.
The Headwaters one is a serious problem and you are right to be suspicious, before the Towers decision, hills in Lynn Valley didn't erode and loose fill never slumped. Now, the evil geniuses at District Hall have bent all of the tree stumps to make it look like the hill is failing. What will they think of next?!
Anon 11:09am, bikes are vehicles under the law. Analyze your own sense of entitlement and learn to share the road. Better yet, get on a bike and experience the crap from drivers for yourself. Remember, driving isn't a right. Especially if it endangers another road user.
Anon 6:58 - Until the day cyclists respect the rules of the road, and lose their adverseness toward being licensed, I don't intend to take any more crap about "cycling rights" on the roadways.
Anon 3:47pm, you've an unfortunate attitude. I hope it doesn't lead to the harm of a cyclist or pedestrian at some point. The roads are paid for by all, whether they drive a car or not. The law says bicycles are to use the roads, so your 'intentions' are nothing more than bravado behind the anonymity of the internet. Hopefully Vision Zero is adopted by the city and districts and the resulting 30 km/h speed limits will mellow your temperament. In the meanwhile, get on a bike, it'll do you good.
Stop, you're both right. Yes cyclists have rights under the Motor Vehicle Act (see below). Yes, cyclists have responsibilities (see below). Bicycles must ride single file, as near as practicable to the right side of the road, and cannot ride across a crosswalk. (see below).
Rights and duties of operator of cycle
183 (1) In addition to the duties imposed by this section, a person operating a cycle on a highway has the same rights and duties as a driver of a vehicle.
(2) A person operating a cycle
(a) must not ride on a sidewalk unless authorized by a bylaw made under section 124 or unless otherwise directed by a sign,
(b) must not, for the purpose of crossing a highway, ride on a crosswalk unless authorized to do so by a bylaw made under section 124 or unless otherwise directed by a sign,
(c) must, subject to paragraph (a), ride as near as practicable to the right side of the highway,
(d) must not ride abreast of another person operating a cycle on the roadway,
(e) must keep at least one hand on the handlebars,
(f) must not ride other than on or astride a regular seat of the cycle,
(g) must not use the cycle to carry more persons at one time than the number for which it is designed and equipped, and
(h) must not ride a cycle on a highway where signs prohibit their use.
I remember reading on this blog about John Sharpe's right rear passenger door being smashed into by a cyclist while he was at a stop sign on 29th St. in Lynn Valley.
He had to pay the $500 deductible on his insurance because the corporation could not retrieve anything from the cyclist because he was not insured.
So, John is out $500 payable to ICBC at no fault of his own.
This is not an even playing field for bikes & cars.
Sue the cyclist. Take his bike if he has no $$ and sell it to offset your costs.
Post a Comment