[Vision2020] Guests or Tenants?

[Joe Campbell]

Gary,

It is not a logical stretch to note that your explanation is a bunch of evasive b-s. Imagine if everyone were to apply such reasoning to every law! What a wonderful world that would be!

It cracks me up when conservatives like you pretend to be men of principle, accusing others of hypocrisy, and then use such slippery rhetoric to allow their friends to get off the hook!

--
Joe Campbell

---- "g. crabtree" <jampot at adelphia.net> wrote: 

=============
Joe.

Your kindness in offering me another chance to respond to your speculative questions is quite touching. As I said in my previous post, I've got no problem with you drawing what ever conclusions make you the happiest. That said...

My understanding of what is and isn't a boarder remains unchanged.

NSA "students" would not be violating any pertinent city code regardless.

I am in favor of fair and equal application of sound law. Even the City realizes that it's codes concerning this matter are confused and unenforceable. Why should I criticize anyone for a hypothetical transgression when the governing body can't tell me precisely what the transgression is or how it differs from several other group living arraignments.

Having said this, conclude what you will. To make the assertion that because I won't join you in a hypothetical condemnation, I must therefore "believe that (my) friends are above the law and beyond contempt." seems like quite the logical stretch.

gc
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Joe Campbell" <joekc at adelphia.net>
To: "g. crabtree" <jampot at adelphia.net>
Cc: <vision2020 at moscow.com>
Sent: Wednesday, November 08, 2006 1:52 PM
Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Guests or Tenants?


Gary,

I asked you a few questions and you ignored all of them. Instead, you offered your all too usual array of insults and evasions. Given this, I drew my own conclusions. Perhaps this was rash, so I'll give you another chance.

Now that you have a clearer understanding of what is and is not a boarder, after your recent extensive research on the subject, in the event that there are actual violations by NSA students of the city code, will you join me in condemning such violations?

If you are unable to criticize your friends for even hypothetical violations of the law, it seems reasonable for me to determine that you believe that your friends are above the law and beyond contempt. Which is precisely what I concluded in my previous posts.

Does my chain of reasoning make sense now?

Best, Joe

---- "g. crabtree" <jampot at adelphia.net> wrote: 

=============
Joe, you are a panic. Your ability to reach a silly conclusion based on what you think you know is second to none. If I had your special ability to read what isn't there into other peoples posts I'd be able to look at "J. O'Ford's" online lunacy and see At Swim-Two-Birds. 

Take from my response whatever will meet your expectations. It's clear that if you don't see what you "thought" you would, you'll create it. This must be a useful talent to possess when it comes to maintaining your hysterical, self-righteousness. If you need to assign someone to fulfill one of the antihero roles in your little mental melodrama, I'm only to happy to be of service. 

You're welcome,
gc
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Joe Campbell" <joekc at adelphia.net>
To: "g. crabtree" <jampot at adelphia.net>
Cc: <vision2020 at moscow.com>
Sent: Wednesday, November 08, 2006 6:16 AM
Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Guests or Tenants?


So the short answer to at least one of my questions is that if someone is a friend of yours and he breaks the law, then we should ignore it. To do otherwise would be to engage in "incessant carping."

Even though this recent round of "incessant carping" began with a post by your friend, Dale Courtney, and that some of us were just responding to his misleading analogies and false accusations, that is all beside the point because, after all, Dale is your friend and he gets to do whatever he wants.

Thanks, Gary! That's exactly what I thought. It explains your role in the NSA saga perfectly!

Best, Joe

---- "g. crabtree" <jampot at adelphia.net> wrote: 

=============
I didn't miss your point Joe, I dismissed it. The long and the short of this topic is this. I did not accuse anyone of violating any laws. If you go back and actually read the exchange between  Ms. Mix and myself you will find that I wished the students success in finding a local home to stay in and that their stay should be as pleasant as possible. In my previous posts I made exactly two points. The first was that the situation that Ms. Mix described in her original request could very easily be construed to meet the city's definition for a boarding house (Ord. 2006-1, 08/07/06) and that I found that amusing and ironic. No amount of sophistry on your part can change this fact. It does and I was. Period. No matter how many, if's, perhaps, maybes, and might have's you throw in. 

The second point was that there was nothing about the topic which would give it some sort of special dispensation from being fair game for comment and discussion, either on Dale Courtney's web site or any other. Once again, I don't see any room for discussion or disagreement.

Everything else you drone on about is simply an exercise in arguing with yourself. (or some here to fore unintroduced third party, with your debate style it's difficult to tell) I do find your remark "The “weekly or longer” phrase here refers to, for instance, an exchange of room and board for some kind of monetary compensation paid, by the boarder, on a WEEKLY, or monthly, or yearly, etc. basis." to be interesting. Does this mean that by some modification of the payment schedule the folks who "host" NSA students can get you and your tolerance club to cease your incessant carping? I didn't think so.

I hope you're enjoying the election,
gc
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Joe Campbell" <joekc at adelphia.net>
To: "g. crabtree" <jampot at adelphia.net>
Cc: <vision2020 at moscow.com>
Sent: Tuesday, November 07, 2006 10:44 AM
Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Guests or Tenants?


Gary,

Not surprisingly, you missed the point. Let me slow things down for you.

I said nothing about there being something in "the city code that distinguishes between one month or four years." I said that there was something in the city code that distinguished between a guest who might stay a month or longer from a boarder who is "housed or fed for compensation on a weekly or longer basis."

The “weekly or longer” phrase here refers to, for instance, an exchange of room and board for some kind of monetary compensation paid, by the boarder, on a WEEKLY, or monthly, or yearly, etc. basis. 

Can you admit this much? If so, then there are CLEAR differences between the situation with regard to Keely's friends and the situation with regard to NSA boarders. 

First, Keely's friends have VIOLATED NO LAWS. There are, as of yet, no Korean student boarders in Moscow and there has not, as of yet, been any WEEKLY (or longer) compensation paid by these non-existent boarders. In the case of NSA students, the allegation, at least, is that there have been violations of the very code you note below, and that there are, as we speak, continued violations of that code. The complaint by folks like myself is that this is part of a general pattern of disregard for city law and disrespect for folks who do not adopt Doug Wilson's narrow worldview.

Second, Keely's original post requested that if anyone was "interested in hosting for a few weeks, with compensation, please e-mail" her friend. My point was that compensation for a few weeks was not the same thing as WEEKLY compensation. I could have stated this more clearly, I admit, but I was in a rush to get to my day job.

Third, there was nothing in Keely’s original post suggesting what form this compensation should take. If it is to take the form of food or odd jobs, as Tom suggests, then I’m not sure how it could be construed as a violation of the city code.

Overall, Dale's comparison between the situation involving Keely's friends and the ones involving NSA students is like the comparison between apples and oranges.

Let me close with a few questions. Since we now have a clearer understanding of what is and is not a boarder, in the event that there are actual violations by NSA students of the city code, will you join me in condemning such violations? If not, what should be done? Why is it that you rush to post about potential violations of the city code when it concerns Keely and her friends yet ignore the allegations of actual violations of the city code when it concerns your friends? Is there something about someone's being your friend that makes him above the law and beyond contempt?

Joe

---- "g. crabtree" <jampot at adelphia.net> wrote: 

=============
Joe asks...

Isn't Keely talking about folks who are visiting for a month or so, not 
folks who are intending to attend and then graduate from some local 
four-year school?

And I reply that I'm sure that she is. The fact that you "would not classify 
putting someone up for a month or so as housing or feeding someone "for 
compensation on a weekly or longer basis." (a phrase that defies logic, but 
I'll assume to take your meaning) makes no difference. There is nothing in 
the city code that distinguishes between one month or four years. Any 
difference that has been discussed so far on this forum has been opinion 
based on personnel feelings, not law. I find it funny and ironic that folks 
who would use this issue to attack one group and then turn around and 
advocate the same thing, all the while claiming a difference based on some 
arbitrary duration and their subjective opinion. The fact that Mr. Courtney 
or anyone else might happen to have an opinion and elect to comment on it 
seems perfectly reasonable to me.

gc
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Joe Campbell" <joekc at adelphia.net>
To: "g. crabtree" <jampot at adelphia.net>
Cc: <vision2020 at moscow.com>
Sent: Monday, November 06, 2006 7:11 AM
Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Guests or Tenants?


> Isn't Keely talking about folks who are visiting for a month or so, not 
> folks who are intending to attend and then graduate from some local 
> four-year school? I would not classify putting someone up for a month or 
> so as housing or feeding someone "for compensation on a weekly or longer 
> basis." It doesn't say housing or feeding "for a week or more."
>
> --
> Joe Campbell
>
> ---- "g. crabtree" <jampot at adelphia.net> wrote:
>
> =============
> For the last couple of days posting to this forum has been a bit screwy 
> from my computer. I hope this only shows up once.
>
>
> Wrong, as usual. City code quite clearly defines boarding house's as
> 12. Boarding House.
>
> A building occupied by its owner in which not more than six (6) roomers, 
> lodgersand/or boarders are housed or fed for compensation on a weekly or 
> longer basis. Ord. 2006-11, 08/07/06)With this in mind, I fail to see how 
> the situation that Ms. Mix is suggesting, and the previous boarding house 
> issue that you have decried with such vigor in the not so distant past, is 
> any different -- aside from the players, of  course. It  seems that you 
> would hold  Ms. Mix and friends to a different  standard than certain 
> "others" that you do not hold in the same high regard.  I can't for the 
> life of me see how it could be inappropriate for Dale to suggest that some 
> small measure of consistency enter into the equation.
>
> gc
>  ----- Original Message ----- 
>  From: Tom Hansen
>  To: 'g. crabtree' ; 'Vision 2020'
>  Sent: Sunday, November 05, 2006 8:10 AM
>  Subject: RE: [Vision2020] Guests or Tenants?
>
>
>  Applying the quotation marks (") to my statement was merely meant to 
> serve as my distinction of the two concepts, not to reflect any specific 
> legal boundary, ok?
>
>
>
>  Although the city code does not (in writing) define a "boarding house", a 
> session (not that long ago) of the city council verbally defined "boarding 
> houses".  I could dig through my repository of audio files of City Council 
> sessions, but I would consider that to be time and effort poorly spent as 
> I am certain that you can recall these sessions on your own.
>
>
>
>  And lastly, Comb-Over's inappropriateness was apparent in his implication 
> at:
>
>
>
>  "I'm sure that everyone she recommends will have their conditional use 
> permits thru the City, approved and paid for - just like every other 
> international student's host family in Moscow has."
>
>
>
>  Enough said.
>
>
>
>  Tom Hansen
>
>  Moscow, Idaho
>
>  Intolerista Sergeant-at-Arms
>
>   "Most truths are so naked that people feel sorry for them and cover them 
> up, at least a little bit."
>  - Edward R. Murrow
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>  From: g. crabtree [mailto:jampot at adelphia.net]
>  Sent: Sunday, November 05, 2006 7:02 AM
>  To: Tom Hansen; Vision 2020
>  Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Guests or Tenants?
>
>
>
>
>
>  After having glanced at the Moscow city code definition of a boarding 
> house, could you please explain how providing accommodations to guests for 
> a couple of weeks for compensation fails to meet the afore mentioned 
> definition? Just exactly where in the code does it distinguish between  a 
> "resident guest" and a "resident tenant"? And lastly, why would it be 
> "inappropriate commentary" to discuss this type of topic on Dale's 
> personal blog and yet be just ducky for you to do the same on your own web 
> site, to which you thoughtfully provided a link, not to mention here on 
> the V?
>
>
>
>  gc
>
>