Unfortunately, a public debate at this point probably wouldn't alter people's opinions and would be a moot point since the case is in court. Until there are some rulings or new information, seems that the current topics have been exhausted.
Customary Use and Our 30A Legacy
- Thread starter Reggie Gaskins
- Start date
-
Trouble logging in? Send us a message with your username and/or email address for help.
Unfortunately, a public debate at this point probably wouldn't alter people's opinions and would be a moot point since the case is in court. Until there are some rulings or new information, seems that the current topics have been exhausted.
CREDIBILITY (noun) the quality of being trusted and believed in.
9 questions to help you evaluate the credibility of news sources - Poynter
As I read back over these posts, it occurred to me that Credibility is what is being questioned and the CU consequences of past and present Walton Commissioners’ CU litigation. Stating facts that dispute CU or support property rights is not trying CU in the public forum but to establish facts and credibility of beliefs and opinions. Why do you believe what you post? Facts or beliefs? For me, so BPOs can know the private property facts and law from CU beliefs. Because like bellybuttons; everyone has an opinion. So what?
Facts are facts and speak for themselves. Do you trust court documents or slides from a known video provocateur off the internet? You may not accept the facts that do not support your belief but regardless who posts them anyone can or should be able to fact-check them. The deliverer of the facts to establish the credibility or incredibility of the belief is inconsequential. Except if the deliverer of the belief consistently does not establish any facts and no credibility over and over and over again; they become not-credible by the lack of facts. Like crying wolf. To state an opinion or belief as a fact - is not a fact.
Example of not credible statements.
#1779. mputnal states “FBB, I have GREAT answers for all your irrelevant, incredible and untruthful questions or false application of one fact ...” What are the great answers? Do not just give an opinion of whatever you do not agree with.
“I work, play and live here. I am in the 30A area most every week ...” but mputnal again did not answer the question; What community do you reside? Goes to credibility many CU believers have expressed about supporting the community because you live or don’t live in South Walton.
#1445 Customary Use and Our 30A Legacy Mputnal “The characters in this thread are not from this community.”
#1666 James Bentwood (pseudonym?). “The real people who live in SoWal and have the guts and accountability to stand up for their community.” Customary Use and Our 30A Legacy Funny for someone who has not denied using a pseudonym.
9 questions to help you evaluate the credibility of news sources - Poynter
As I read back over these posts, it occurred to me that Credibility is what is being questioned and the CU consequences of past and present Walton Commissioners’ CU litigation. Stating facts that dispute CU or support property rights is not trying CU in the public forum but to establish facts and credibility of beliefs and opinions. Why do you believe what you post? Facts or beliefs? For me, so BPOs can know the private property facts and law from CU beliefs. Because like bellybuttons; everyone has an opinion. So what?
Facts are facts and speak for themselves. Do you trust court documents or slides from a known video provocateur off the internet? You may not accept the facts that do not support your belief but regardless who posts them anyone can or should be able to fact-check them. The deliverer of the facts to establish the credibility or incredibility of the belief is inconsequential. Except if the deliverer of the belief consistently does not establish any facts and no credibility over and over and over again; they become not-credible by the lack of facts. Like crying wolf. To state an opinion or belief as a fact - is not a fact.
Example of not credible statements.
#1779. mputnal states “FBB, I have GREAT answers for all your irrelevant, incredible and untruthful questions or false application of one fact ...” What are the great answers? Do not just give an opinion of whatever you do not agree with.
“I work, play and live here. I am in the 30A area most every week ...” but mputnal again did not answer the question; What community do you reside? Goes to credibility many CU believers have expressed about supporting the community because you live or don’t live in South Walton.
#1445 Customary Use and Our 30A Legacy Mputnal “The characters in this thread are not from this community.”
#1666 James Bentwood (pseudonym?). “The real people who live in SoWal and have the guts and accountability to stand up for their community.” Customary Use and Our 30A Legacy Funny for someone who has not denied using a pseudonym.
And where do the many defendants who find themselves named in a frivolous lawsuit simply because they own beachfront property of some kind, fit into this scenario? Some of them may even support customary use. If the judge throws out this lawsuit, is Surfer Dude and his followers going to pay for their legal costs? I suspect that we the taxpayers will pay.
FBB, Do you work, play and live in this community? I do. Why can't you answer that question? Heck you even ask me questions that you have already stated as irrelevant so I am just borrowing from you. I think you need to go back and read it again and you will find my answers. Me thinks you just don't like my answers! Credibility is important. Community is important. Being social is healthy. Your questions are starting to smell kind of rotten. I believe my offer for a fish fry summit would help you freshen up a bit with your civility and clear up the credibility issues. You should seriously consider my offer. Do you even like seafood?
Kathryn, I suspect many BPO's support public beach, community good will and are very good and moral people. Unfortunately the "mean old power brokers" are leading them down a path of conflict and disharmony with most non-BPO's. When the power brokers made this about exclusive private beaches the County had no other choice in the matter. None. Excluding respectful people and families from the beach by an individual is not a constitutional power in my opinion. Individuals with that kind of power would be considered an elitist autocrat or despot. I read this in the hyperlink that FBB gave me about minority and majority rights so it is a fact as FBB would say. All of us in this forum have opinions and the court will decide the facts. Individuals should not have supreme power to decide who can use the beach. My opinion has evolved after reading the posts of these power brokers who desire control over "our" beaches.
If CU believers want to describe the half of Walton's 26 miles of legally titled private beachfront property as "our beaches". I think we should describe those CU beliefs as a "CU mob mentality"; at least until the US courts have ruled on the ancient English common law of customary use. Or stop using "our beaches" when by law it is not. Walton wants to take the BPO choice to share their private property or not. That's political power, the Constitution protects individual rights against.
Mptnal, your original statement was “Okay I have read some of the contents of the hearing and I would say… The county seems to be "sufficiently clear" in conclusion of it's determination of customary beach use by the public”
Great, enlighten us, show us ANY of the content provided by that County that shows it is ‘sufficient clear” to remove property rights in Walton County.
Now your statement seems to have changed “ I speculate that the evidence is similar to the words of one of our founding fathers, "self-evident".
So did you review and find content or evidence backing the county’s claim that removing property rights is ancient, reasonable, without interruption, and without dispute, or do you speculate the county would not spend millions of dollars SUING EVERY WALTON COUNTY PROPERTY OWNER THAT HAS LEGALLY DEEDED BEACH FRONT PROPERTY without evidence? Your right, who would commit to spending Millions of dollars without any facts to back up the claim in a court of law? Surely the evidence exists, doesn’t it?
Also note that ALL evidence by the County has ALREADY been submitted to prove their claim. They are not going to be able to make up and submit new evidence. So, if you have reviewed any of these documents that make it “sufficiently clear”, please share it!
This lawsuit has NOTHING to do with going to the beach or keeping people off the beach. The State of Florida provides the right to walk the entire coastline, swim, fish, take pictures, and build sandcastles. So, what is the lawsuit about? It is about getting more property to DAY CAMP for UNLIMTED people with UNLIMITED beach equipment against the will of the property owner because the amount of beach previously purchased and made Public is grossly insufficient to handle the exponential growing tourist population. This year 4 million tourists. What happens when we have 6 million tourist per year? What about 8 million tourists? The county is attempting to TAKE property rights (right of exclusion) with no compensation, from land that prior to 2016 the BCC CONFIRM WAS PRIVATE IN COURT!
So, what happened in 2016 that all of a sudden, the Private property in Walton County no longer has Property Rights? That is a real question because prior to that the BCC confirmed Private Property Rights in Walton County. If the BCC thought they already controlled ALL THE DRY SAND BEACH in Walton County, why did they ever buy property that was previously private to make “Public Beach”?
More than willing to a nice discussion over a fish fry, but you got to come the table with actual facts to discuss, not that you believe that somehow property rights should not exist for a certain group of people because decades ago they have legal deeded property that is now in high demand and the county wants to generate huge profit for businessmen and developers by using private property against the will of the property owner. What is to prevent the BCC trying this to your property and every other property in Walton County?
Please provide the facts and evidence that is the basis for removing property rights for every single Walton County Legally Deeded beach property owner that shows it is ancient, reasonable, without interruption, and without dispute, and then we can discuss the rest at the fish fry.
Great, enlighten us, show us ANY of the content provided by that County that shows it is ‘sufficient clear” to remove property rights in Walton County.
Now your statement seems to have changed “ I speculate that the evidence is similar to the words of one of our founding fathers, "self-evident".
So did you review and find content or evidence backing the county’s claim that removing property rights is ancient, reasonable, without interruption, and without dispute, or do you speculate the county would not spend millions of dollars SUING EVERY WALTON COUNTY PROPERTY OWNER THAT HAS LEGALLY DEEDED BEACH FRONT PROPERTY without evidence? Your right, who would commit to spending Millions of dollars without any facts to back up the claim in a court of law? Surely the evidence exists, doesn’t it?
Also note that ALL evidence by the County has ALREADY been submitted to prove their claim. They are not going to be able to make up and submit new evidence. So, if you have reviewed any of these documents that make it “sufficiently clear”, please share it!
This lawsuit has NOTHING to do with going to the beach or keeping people off the beach. The State of Florida provides the right to walk the entire coastline, swim, fish, take pictures, and build sandcastles. So, what is the lawsuit about? It is about getting more property to DAY CAMP for UNLIMTED people with UNLIMITED beach equipment against the will of the property owner because the amount of beach previously purchased and made Public is grossly insufficient to handle the exponential growing tourist population. This year 4 million tourists. What happens when we have 6 million tourist per year? What about 8 million tourists? The county is attempting to TAKE property rights (right of exclusion) with no compensation, from land that prior to 2016 the BCC CONFIRM WAS PRIVATE IN COURT!
So, what happened in 2016 that all of a sudden, the Private property in Walton County no longer has Property Rights? That is a real question because prior to that the BCC confirmed Private Property Rights in Walton County. If the BCC thought they already controlled ALL THE DRY SAND BEACH in Walton County, why did they ever buy property that was previously private to make “Public Beach”?
More than willing to a nice discussion over a fish fry, but you got to come the table with actual facts to discuss, not that you believe that somehow property rights should not exist for a certain group of people because decades ago they have legal deeded property that is now in high demand and the county wants to generate huge profit for businessmen and developers by using private property against the will of the property owner. What is to prevent the BCC trying this to your property and every other property in Walton County?
Please provide the facts and evidence that is the basis for removing property rights for every single Walton County Legally Deeded beach property owner that shows it is ancient, reasonable, without interruption, and without dispute, and then we can discuss the rest at the fish fry.
Well written SCJ. VERY well done!
And I agree 100%.
Still somewhat puzzling that the CU supporters have not or will not state why it is in the best interest of ALL OF US that millions OF OUR MONEY is being spent by the county on this issue.
And I agree 100%.
Still somewhat puzzling that the CU supporters have not or will not state why it is in the best interest of ALL OF US that millions OF OUR MONEY is being spent by the county on this issue.
SCJ, when can you calendar a fish fry summit? You and I are not accomplishing anything here. I think a change of venue would be good. I don't know why you are not listening to the answers but maybe a public debate would be more helpful for this community to hear people from both sides. Since you are "more than willing" I applaud you as being the only one so far from the private beaches side to commit. Lets get this thing rolling! Let's advertise as Private Exclusive Beach vs Public Beach where Families are always welcome.
We will need a moderator for the public debate. Maybe about 12 questions from the moderator and 12 questions from the public audience. It will help all of us to learn how to be more respectful more civil...I hope! We do not have to be enemies is my motto
We will need a moderator for the public debate. Maybe about 12 questions from the moderator and 12 questions from the public audience. It will help all of us to learn how to be more respectful more civil...I hope! We do not have to be enemies is my motto
I'm no lawyer but my understanding is that a plaintiff must prove his case. How do the plaintiffs prove their case against several thousand people? And what are they trying to prove?