That's hilarious; good point JodiFL. Here you have the same 6 or 8 people talking in circles in this echo chamber of a thread. 20,000 views. Ha ha. Estimate 19,700 are of them reading their own stuff and replying to their own stuff. I would not exactly call this a "high engagement" thread by any stretch of the imagination. Reminds me of someone with 42 twitter followers. Where are the 6500 adoring fans representing and appreciating the viewpoints expressed? Another echo chamber there as well. "Just a handful."
Mr. Rauschkolb, if engaging on this thread is so insignificant, then why are you?
An '
echo chamber' is a metaphorical description of a situation in which beliefs are amplified or reinforced by communication and repetition inside a
closed system.
Sure. It's a catchy little term to throw around by those who like to continuously speak in false narratives to the uninformed masses, but the term certainly does not
not apply here.
Why? Because this forum is anything but
closed. In fact it's very
open to the public. Reggie opened this discussion asking some honest, serious, heart felt, thought provoking questions. Many informative facts followed by others (who must remain anonymous thanks to the documented intimidation tactics such as doxxing and staged video ambush by the agitators. That's right. Pro-property rights advocates are fearful of speaking out or even "following" similar groups because of such effective intimidation targeting spurred by a vicious social media campaign.)
And, where are all those opposing replies and answers to the questions presented in this long thread? After 20,000 views? And it's a very hot topic. If there was indeed any factual opposition, it surely would be presented here. Resoundingly so.
Dave, unless you have some insider knowledge of the specific metrics of this platform, perhaps you should reconsider your assumption about those 20,000 views. You might just be wrong. Perhaps they are actually representative of a silent majority now absorbing all these facts that have not been refuted. Not once.
Merely "
calling" a fact "
alternative" is not good enough for the majority of the educated professionals in our area. (I'm referring to the educated professionals who actually spend money in the upscale restaurants and shops advertised on this site. The ones who are very busy with their professions and giving back time serving the community and don't have time to be keyboard warriors.) Oppositional so-called "replies" filled with only emotional opinions or mere repetitive, disrespectful graveside memes by a known local troll seriously turn off the educated reader from even considering to engage here, so you can't really blame them.
The lack of factual opposition is indicative of a silent readership now scratching their heads, wondering if they have been bamboozled from the beginning by orchestrated social media campaign that has been quite misleading, built on emotion, not facts. And certainly not sound principles of public policy. Perhaps there is a silent majority who are having their eyes now opened, in that "lightbulb -Ah Ha" moment, as they realize the deep and revelatory hypocrisy of the instigators and agitators of the customary use battle.
Overdevelopment greed is what is truly driving the CU bus. Perhaps there is a silent majority who are now actively re-evaluating this whole customary use legal battle. A battle that will accomplish nothing over the next decade other than create deep painful social divisions and needlessly cost millions of taxpayer dollars. Funds that could have been spent on so many community amenities to the delightful benefit of our county's citizens and visitors. So
many other wonderful ways we could have spent those millions of dollars. Oh, let me count the ways.
But development greed has successfully orchestrated a propaganda machine to convince a community to actually foot the bill on their behalf, for the sake of
more overdevelopment. Slick move by the power brokers.
I genuinely feel sorry for the good people who have joined the CU bandwagon thinking that this is all on behalf of their grandchildren. No. It's about turning over the
control of the
commercialization of the beaches from private home owners to a county government. A local government not exactly known for its reputation for honesty when it comes to development and commerce.
The silly point you were trying to fabricate here Dave is completely without merit, and obviously yet another attempted distraction from the very serious issue at hand that we were trying to openly discuss in this forum. It surprises me that you think so many people would be fooled by those cotton candy words of yours. Go ahead. Enjoy your frivolous fun and make light of this dreadful community division that you have single-handedly spearheaded over the years, causing a great deal of personal pain for thousands of very innocent people on both sides of the CU battle. It's not funny to us at all.
Dave, if the facts presented here in this open public forum are incorrect, then
where are your 6500 adoring fans presenting factual
corrections?
Or maybe you can shed some light personally, Dave. Tell us just one
fact that was presented in this thread that is not actually true. Just one. Go ahead. I'll wait.
It's pretty simple, Dave.
Renaming a truth chamber an "echo chamber" doesn't make it so.