Roundtable meets with Dr. Kroll

User avatar
kellory
 
Posts: 2621
Joined: Tue Jul 26, 2011 3:01 pm
Location: Ohio

Re: Roundtable meets with Dr. Kroll

Postby kellory » Sun Jan 15, 2012 3:15 am

retch sweeny wrote:Favor and fortune smile upon the engaged, prepared and willing and since half the battle is showing up, I’d say we are ahead of the game.

Sounds to me as if the other side was not invited to the meeting. Hardly a victory. It would appear to be a rail roading.
The only real difference between a good tracker and a bad tracker is observation. All the same data is present for both. The rest is understanding what you are seeing.

retch sweeny
 
Posts: 565
Joined: Mon Feb 23, 2009 11:05 am

Re: Roundtable meets with Dr. Kroll

Postby retch sweeny » Sun Jan 15, 2012 9:41 am

The invite list was long and included Wisconsin's legitimate hunting and conservation orgs.

User avatar
kellory
 
Posts: 2621
Joined: Tue Jul 26, 2011 3:01 pm
Location: Ohio

Re: Roundtable meets with Dr. Kroll

Postby kellory » Sun Jan 15, 2012 11:13 am

retch sweeny wrote:The invite list was long and included Wisconsin's legitimate hunting and conservation orgs.
And just who decides what groups are "legitimate" ? Perhaps provide the list of invitees? Just to show how even handed it was. And who is not on the list. :|
The only real difference between a good tracker and a bad tracker is observation. All the same data is present for both. The rest is understanding what you are seeing.

retch sweeny
 
Posts: 565
Joined: Mon Feb 23, 2009 11:05 am

Re: Roundtable meets with Dr. Kroll

Postby retch sweeny » Sun Jan 15, 2012 12:07 pm

Beats me! I did not generate the list of invitees. I do not have the lists of invitees but I think it’s a safe bet that the legitimacy, validity and viability of the orgs were the primary reasons they were invited. I get a sense that you are of the opinion that a certain upstart org (that may or may not even still be active in WI) should have been invited.

Legitimacy, viability and validity of an org are based on a number of factors including (but not limited to)


1. Tenure: meaning that if my buddies and I start and org today that meets in my garage, we should not expect to be invited to meetings as described above. Orgs come and go. Those that have been around for a while with a proven track record are invited to such meetings.

2. Membership size: meaning that even if they have tenure but they cant muster up but a handful of members in that time, they should not expect to be invited to meetings as described above.

3. A publically supported mission: meaning that if the org has a mission counter to the wishes of the hunting community such as a mission to ban Sunday, deer hunting in WI that they should expect not to be invited to deer hunting related meetings as described above.

As well as others things that can establish an orgs legitimacy, validity and viability. There are orgs (I know of one perfect example) that have no tenure, little if any membership and have a mission that runs counter to the wishes of the majority of the hunting public in WI. They were not invited to the meetings described above and I think that was the proper thing to do.

Dan Salmon
 
Posts: 615
Joined: Mon May 05, 2008 7:52 am

Re: Roundtable meets with Dr. Kroll

Postby Dan Salmon » Sun Jan 15, 2012 1:15 pm

So, first you state the list was long and listed all the legitimate organizations, then when asked to prove it you can't. Can you name any of the other organizations that were in attendance? That may give some validity to your statements. As far as safe bets, there are no such things, especially when the government is involved.

User avatar
kellory
 
Posts: 2621
Joined: Tue Jul 26, 2011 3:01 pm
Location: Ohio

Re: Roundtable meets with Dr. Kroll

Postby kellory » Sun Jan 15, 2012 1:36 pm

I am not from your state, nor do I even know the names of your organizations, legitamate or not. But the process sounds like dirty pool. If you are in lockstep you are invited. If you have a new idea, or a small following, you are excluded. Doesn't that flow counter to the concept of free speech? If you try to counter the status quo, you have no voice. Does your governmen fear a disenting voice that much, that they would silence it by exclusion? No representation at meetings? Can these groups apply to be put on the invite list? Or must they be silent and take what's coming to them? :|
The only real difference between a good tracker and a bad tracker is observation. All the same data is present for both. The rest is understanding what you are seeing.

retch sweeny
 
Posts: 565
Joined: Mon Feb 23, 2009 11:05 am

Re: Roundtable meets with Dr. Kroll

Postby retch sweeny » Sun Jan 15, 2012 1:43 pm

Dan Salmon wrote:So, first you state the list was long and listed all the legitimate organizations, then when asked to prove it you can't. Can you name any of the other organizations that were in attendance? That may give some validity to your statements. As far as safe bets, there are no such things, especially when the government is involved.


Its not my place to list the names of the attendees. I understand your desire to have every bit of information delivered to your internet at your request. Its time you pick yourself up by your boot straps and take a little initiative for a change. This entitlement mindset of yours is unfortunate.

retch sweeny
 
Posts: 565
Joined: Mon Feb 23, 2009 11:05 am

Re: Roundtable meets with Dr. Kroll

Postby retch sweeny » Sun Jan 15, 2012 1:59 pm

kellory wrote: I am not from your state, nor do I even know the names of your organizations, legitamate or not.


Then the mind boggles at your concern.

kellory wrote: But the process sounds like dirty pool.


Of course it does since you’re on the outside looking in and your agenda is not catered to. That way, you can claim impropriety (when none exists) and claim to be on the side of the oppressed. There is nothing new about that stratagey.

kellory wrote: If you are in lockstep you are invited.


Yes, in lock step with a panel seeking to improve Wisconsin’s deer management program. That is a noble issue to be in lock step with, don’t you agree?

kellory wrote: If you have a new idea, or a small following, you are excluded.


New ideas are most certainly welcome, the one you suggest is hardly new at all. Its been discussed to death in WI and we know the opinions of the majority. A small following is ample reason not to be included, it speaks to your validity, credibility and value. It says, “we are a small minority” and by definition, they would have no seat. Perhaps a few friends and I should form a group tomorrow with a mission counter to the opinion of the public and even though we would be but a handful of people, we should expect to be invited to such a meeting. LOL

kellory wrote: Doesn't that flow counter to the concept of free speech?


Not in the slightest. The Good Dr. is holding a variety of town hall meetings around the state this spring and his web site is accepting all voices and opinions. Speech away!

kellory wrote: Does your governmen fear a disenting voice that much, that they would silence it by exclusion?


I rather doubt it but It was a meeting with a group of orgs and certainly had to have a cap if only for logistics sake. I know you hoped the crossbow org in WI (if it is still in operation) were invited but it sounds as though they are defunked. Their president left the state and it seems as though there is no leadership. (or even who (if any) their board members are (were) that does not boad well for being included in such weighty deliberations.

kellory wrote: Can these groups apply to be put on the invite list?


Beats me but these were the last of such meetings. It is my understanding that somebody from the aforementioned club asked to be included but was not allowed for what I think are good reasons as described above.

kellory wrote: Or must they be silent and take what's coming to them? :|


Several town hall meetings and the opportunity to provide input via the Good Dr’s web page means no voice is silenced.

User avatar
kellory
 
Posts: 2621
Joined: Tue Jul 26, 2011 3:01 pm
Location: Ohio

Re: Roundtable meets with Dr. Kroll

Postby kellory » Sun Jan 15, 2012 7:30 pm

retch sweeny wrote:
kellory wrote: I am not from your state, nor do I even know the names of your organizations, legitamate or not.


Then the mind boggles at your concern.

kellory wrote: But the process sounds like dirty pool.


Of course it does since you’re on the outside looking in and your agenda is not catered to. That way, you can claim impropriety (when none exists) and claim to be on the side of the oppressed. There is nothing new about that stratagey.

kellory wrote: If you are in lockstep you are invited.


Yes, in lock step with a panel seeking to improve Wisconsin’s deer management program. That is a noble issue to be in lock step with, don’t you agree?

kellory wrote: If you have a new idea, or a small following, you are excluded.


New ideas are most certainly welcome, the one you suggest is hardly new at all. Its been discussed to death in WI and we know the opinions of the majority. A small following is ample reason not to be included, it speaks to your validity, credibility and value. It says, “we are a small minority” and by definition, they would have no seat. Perhaps a few friends and I should form a group tomorrow with a mission counter to the opinion of the public and even though we would be but a handful of people, we should expect to be invited to such a meeting. LOL

kellory wrote: Doesn't that flow counter to the concept of free speech?


Not in the slightest. The Good Dr. is holding a variety of town hall meetings around the state this spring and his web site is accepting all voices and opinions. Speech away!

kellory wrote: Does your governmen fear a disenting voice that much, that they would silence it by exclusion?


I rather doubt it but It was a meeting with a group of orgs and certainly had to have a cap if only for logistics sake. I know you hoped the crossbow org in WI (if it is still in operation) were invited but it sounds as though they are defunked. Their president left the state and it seems as though there is no leadership. (or even who (if any) their board members are (were) that does not boad well for being included in such weighty deliberations.

kellory wrote: Can these groups apply to be put on the invite list?


Beats me but these were the last of such meetings. It is my understanding that somebody from the aforementioned club asked to be included but was not allowed for what I think are good reasons as described above.

kellory wrote: Or must they be silent and take what's coming to them? :|


Several town hall meetings and the opportunity to provide input via the Good Dr’s web page means no voice is silenced.

....................................................................................................................................................................kellory"] I am not from your state, nor do I even know the names of your organizations, legitamate or not. [/quote]

Then the mind boggles at your concern. (You guys brought your fight here. Deal with it..)...................................................................................................................................................kellory"] But the process sounds like dirty pool. [/quote]

Of course it does since you’re on the outside looking in and your agenda is not catered to. That way, you can claim impropriety (when none exists) and claim to be on the side of the oppressed. There is nothing new about that stratagey.(Everyone not in lockstep is on the outside looking in. And I have no dogs in your fight (translation: no agenda)).......................................................................................................................................................Yes, in lock step with a panel seeking to improve Wisconsin’s deer management program. That is a noble issue to be in lock step with, don’t you agree?.(NOBLE? you might want to try a diferent word! "Distinguishing by rank and title...pertaining to persons so distinguished....of high birth or exalted rank ;aristocratic. which meaning did you have in mind? And if you disagree with somothing, or want to try something else, is it "off with his head!" or "banish him!"?.)..................................................................................................................................................New ideas are most certainly welcome, the one you suggest is hardly new at all. Its been discussed to death in WI and we know the opinions of the majority. A small following is ample reason not to be included, it speaks to your validity, credibility and value. It says, “we are a small minority” and by definition, they would have no seat. Perhaps a few friends and I should form a group tomorrow with a mission counter to the opinion of the public and even though we would be but a handful of people, we should expect to be invited to such a meeting. LOL (As long as you stay at the children"s table and don't interfere with the big people and their important stuff, you can watch from over there, but be quiet ok?, When you are big enough and old enough to think for yourself, then we think about letting you join in,.....if you go along with whatever we say.) Sounds like the way some children are treated.
...................................................................................................................................................................................kellory"] Does your governmen fear a disenting voice that much, that they would silence it by exclusion? [/quote]

I rather doubt it but It was a meeting with a group of orgs and certainly had to have a cap if only for logistics sake. I know you hoped the crossbow org in WI (if it is still in operation) were invited but it sounds as though they are defunked. Their president left the state and it seems as though there is no leadership. (or even who (if any) their board members are (were) that does not boad well for being included in such weighty deliberations.( Work out your own logistics between all the effected parties. A I tell you again, I have no connections with crossbow org you site. I have no agenda/ no dogs in this fight, I have told you this muliple times now, but it slips away faster than a campain promise. Retention please? How else will you remember all those mistakes throughout history , so as to avoid them the next time? Mistakes like bringing a fight to a public forum and expecting a private party.) This forum prides itself on clean language, mutual respect, facts and opinions with the ability to back up either, and what is best for hunting and hunters. Key omong those is mutual respect. On this subject (crossbows) that is missing. Do I need to go through your posts and cut and paste all the dismissive kook, fringe, waco type comments about anyone who disagrees with you? To dismiss facts in favor of opinion? "Well, the voters decided that dogs are cats, cause they don't like dogs no more, so they are all cats now, we voted on it so that is it." "But mine really is a dog, sir! "SILENCE, THERE ARE NO MORE DOGS"! we voted on it!"(this is a depiction, no cats or dogs were harmed in it's creation) But to dismiss people until their numbers are enough to overwelm oposition is foolish. Listen to all your people, let them help with the process, instead of being in constant opposition to it. You provided a link to see one of these meetings (thank you) it was not large, it could have taken place in my kitchen. It would have been simple to add a few seats. Let's not let that Noble bearing get in the way, try a little Largess. Listening used to be concidered a political skill. :|
The only real difference between a good tracker and a bad tracker is observation. All the same data is present for both. The rest is understanding what you are seeing.

retch sweeny
 
Posts: 565
Joined: Mon Feb 23, 2009 11:05 am

Re: Roundtable meets with Dr. Kroll

Postby retch sweeny » Sun Jan 15, 2012 7:48 pm

If you can clean that up and make it readable, I might try reading it. It seems you double quote everything and I dont have the time to try and figure out were your quote from me and your thoughts begin and end.

Previous

Return to Wisconsin

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests