Quote:
Originally Posted by Lord Carnage
facepalm (see, I can do that too, though i mean no offense in doing so)... 
I really don't get why everyone on the "Pro-City" side of this discussion is so staunchly there with no desire to understand other points of view. |
Your first post made a handful of claims that have been meticulously refuted in the last few pages (but fair enough, this thread has moved fast).
The last few pages have been all about us trying to understand other POV. Sure, a some have been dismissive and argumentative, but many of us have been probing to understand Bingo et. al's position better.
Quote:
That doesn't change the fact that an idea or proposal does NOT need an official report to be rejected. If I propose something to the City, does that mean they need to issue a formal response just because I propose something?
|
Apparently they did need it - all evidence points to the city rejecting the concept in the early phases, and the Flames apparently not listening. I'll acknowledge that something doesn't add up, though. Maybe simple miscommunication, maybe the Flames didn't want to hear.
Quote:
|
If the Flames said, "Let's bulldoze the Big 4 and build an arena there", would the City and/or the Stampede Board come up with a bunch of research to back their position of, "No, this does not fit with our plans because of x."? Of course not, and rational human beings would understand why (yes, that means not everyone would understand - probably much outrage too).
|
I gotta run now, but this did more/less happen. Stampede came to the table and considered the idea...