PHILADELPHIA | Schuylkill Yards Future Phases | 1,095 - 375 FT | 70 - 28 FLOORS

[jjv007]

Exactly why I said we should not involve these sort of discussions on the forum ^^

[jjv007]

Originally Posted by Cro Burnham

Jurisdicitional policy on civil rights, to the extent that it affects corporate relocation decisions, as it did in the Paypal case, seems like a legit topic to discuss on a development forum, in the same way that jurisdictional tax and regulatory policies are legit to discuss and debate. The fact that Pennsylvania is a relatively inclusive place vs., say, NC, would now appear to be a business advantage, probably one of the few we have.

If someone wants to argue that Paypal is wrong for leaving NC for this reason, or that PA should have more restrictive civil rights policies, go for it I say. Those arguments might be idiotic in my opinion, but it's all part of the conversation.

But if opinions on this are not a legitimate discussion topic, than neither are opinions on tax, regulatory, or incentive policy, which are equally political/ideological issues.

Maybe you are being just a tad touchy.

I have my own opinion on how these two topics of discussion differ but I prefer not to get into it at the time-being so as to not further draw the thread off-topic.

[Cro Burnham]

Personally, I could care less if threads get side-tracked with useless political conversations, so I also could care less if everything relating to this sequence of posts, this included, is deleted.

But, for the record, in three or four distinctly apolitical and probably needlessly longwinded and verbose posts relating to Paypal, John Fry's Schuylkill Yards vision, regional innovation status, Guam, back office operations, large floor plates, parking aprons, and all the other kinds of really boring stuff I can blather on about ignorantly and pointlessly for paragraphs, I made made one tiny two-word reference to (by no means "a conversation" about) religious extremism. And please note, I very tactfully, very carefully avoided even mentioning that I was alluding specifically to rabid extremist Bahá'í-ists.

Originally Posted by Cro Burnham

It seems to me Paypal is maybe just looking for the cheapest non-religious extremist state in which to put a back-office processing center

I mean, I guess it's obvious to everyone that the Bahá'í-ists are what is causing all the problems down there. My bad for being so obvious.

Originally Posted by jjv007

Posts I scarcely view as political are lashed out against while others that are clearly political are hardly given a thought . . . I believe this sort of conversation should be condemned by the mods.

Originally Posted by jjv007

Exactly why I said we should not involve these sort of discussions on the forum ^^

Originally Posted by jjv007

I have my own opinion on how these two topics of discussion differ but I prefer not to get into it at the time-being so as to not further draw the thread off-topic.

But had you simply ignored that two-word veiled jab at the Bahá'í faith buried beneath 13,000 other words of urban development blather, we could have continued on our otherwise dull and apolitical conversation about Schuylkill Yards and Paypal processing centers.

Your subsequent multiple repeated claims that you wished to avoid starting a political discussion while repeatedly bringing up a political conversation that never really existed other than through your having repeatedly brought it up is an example of a very interesting rhetorical device called apophasis or praeteritio:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apophasis

Interestingly, none other than Donald Trump himself is a master at deploying this technique to great effect and entertainment, as was pointed out by Slate.com recently:

http://www.slate.com/articles/video/...o_is_also.html

Praeteritio is the act of saying something by saying that you’re not going to say it. Like, for instance, when Trump calls Rubio a lightweight by saying “I’m not going to call him a lightweight, because I think that’s a derogatory term.” It’s a rhetorical device as old as political rhetoric itself, once proudly wielded by Cicero, who often “refused to mention” the various crimes committed by Catiline and his supporters.

As with Cicero, Trump uses praeteritio to insult his opponents while also suggesting he’s the kind of guy who’s above insulting his opponents. It’s a neat trick.

So I congratulate you on your excellent use of praeteritio in bringing up a subject that you wanted to bring up while implying that it was not you who brought it up.

I would ask that Boxbot create an "Apophasis" thead and a "Bahá'í" extremist thread.

[hammersklavier]

Originally Posted by jjv007

It seems like the political restrictions of this forum are highly ill-defined. Posts I scarcely view as political are lashed out against while others that are clearly political are hardly given a thought.

Local and state politics are usually tolerated in city discussion threads, while national politics are not (and if you think there's a lot here, may I introduce you to the Chicago GD thread, where practically every other post is local politics), mainly because only locals really care about local politics while national politics can attract trolls from all over the place. That's why talking about national politics is confined to Current Events.

[jjv007]

Originally Posted by hammersklavier

Local and state politics are usually tolerated in city discussion threads, while national politics are not (and if you think there's a lot here, may I introduce you to the Chicago GD thread, where practically every other post is local politics), mainly because only locals really care about local politics while national politics can attract trolls from all over the place. That's why talking about national politics is confined to Current Events.

I still think the rules need to be more clearly defined. Does out of state politics (such as North Carolina's) count under "state politics"? It seems to me talking about politics of other states would attract just as many trolls as "national discussions." The issue jsbrook, CroBurnham, and allovertown decided to expound upon can largely be considered national and links very thinly at best I believe to Philadelphia-related development.
Stating an opinion on the moral merit of PayPal's decision to not move into Charlotte IMO had very little to do with the current discussion. On the other hand, discussing politics in regards to PA state taxes or the conflict between the state Democratic governor and GOP legislature is political yet I believe helpful to topics at hand. The reason being that such issues often directly correlate to the approval or rejection of projects in the Philadelphia area, the economy as a whole, or other similar matters.
The PayPal decision was significant in that their withdrawal from Charlotte left their future situation somewhat in limbo thereby naturally producing various speculation from members on this thread. However, using the occasion to present opinions on a national, controversial issue that veered off the spirit of the discussion was not in the best taste IMO.
If the mods wish to make this thread more open to various topics of discussion and not curb talk of politics that come along as part of the banter, then I'm fine with that. Heated political discussions come along relatively infrequently anyway and I believe that most members of the forum prefer to discuss more neutral development news in any case. However, Hammer was the one who stated a few pages ago on this thread (post #259) a relatively emphatic message of "no politics."
I just feel the line of demarcation has become increasingly gray and there have been several instances lately of people on both ends of the spectrum unhappy with what has been said or limited from being said on this forum. I hope we all can come to a better understanding.

[Knight Hospitaller]

Originally Posted by allovertown

What exactly would you call someone who is against civil equality for gay people for religious reasons? Don't be ridiculous. What is happening in NC is not a political debate, it's straight up bigotry.

Telling guys that they can't go in a women's restroom is just otherworldly crazy, I guess. Have a nice day being "tolerant."

[Cro Burnham]

Some people are SOOOO touchy!!!!

Paypal bailed on NC because it perceived the state's new law would be detrimental to employee retention and recruitment. That's Paypal's free market prerogative, good for them. Those opposed can boycott paypal. The newspapers here reported on the possibility that Philly, lacking similar laws, could attract Paypal possibly; then someone here suggested Schuylkill Yards as a great potential Paypal location. Perhaps this whole turn of events gets a few folks' panties in a bunch because it casts their ideology in a certain unflattering light. But just because one has thin skin about one's social views doesn't make others' discussing these facts a political provocation. C'mon, toughen up, grow some hair on dem nadz and move on already.

NC made a decision and now is dealing with an unintended consequence. So be it. Maybe even Philly can benefit from such new forms of regional competitive advantage in the future. Good for us if we can. States win some and lose some based on the policies and decisions they make. Live with it, folks.

[Cro Burnham]

Originally Posted by Knight Hospitaller

Telling guys that they can't go in a women's restroom is just otherworldly crazy, I guess. Have a nice day being "tolerant."

There's a perpetual war on Christmas too.

[allovertown]

Originally Posted by Knight Hospitaller

Telling guys that they can't go in a women's restroom is just otherworldly crazy, I guess. Have a nice day being "tolerant."

Misinformed right wing talking points don't make North Carolina's laws any less disgusting. Let's set aside the fact that the guys that are being told they can't use the women's room aren't "guys." The restroom issue is pretty easy to understand if you ignore the fear mongering tactics from the right.

But let's just ignore that whole debate because the most damaging part of the law is how it severely reduces equal protection under law for the LGBT community and creates the opportunity for LGBT community to be discriminated against without legal recourse.

Such a law is bigoted. It's supporters, bigots.

To call this debate political is absurd. Every American deserves equal protection under the law, it isn't a matter of political debate.

[Knight Hospitaller]

Originally Posted by Cro Burnham

Some people are SOOOO touchy!!!!

Paypal bailed on NC because it perceived the state's new law would be detrimental to employee retention and recruitment. That's Paypal's free market prerogative, good for them. Those opposed can boycott paypal. The newspapers here reported on the possibility that Philly, lacking similar laws, could attract Paypal possibly; then someone here suggested Schuylkill Yards as a great potential Paypal location. Perhaps this whole turn of events gets a few folks' panties in a bunch because it casts their ideology in a certain unflattering light. But just because one has thin skin about one's social views doesn't make others' discussing these facts a political provocation. C'mon, toughen up, grow some hair on dem nadz and move on already.

NC made a decision and now is dealing with an unintended consequence. So be it. Maybe even Philly can benefit from such new forms of regional competitive advantage in the future. Good for us if we can. States win some and lose some based on the policies and decisions they make. Live with it, folks.

I have no problem with the idea that there may be an opportunity to profit from NC's loss. You don't have to label them "religious extremists" in connection with that. As far as "touchy" goes, that describes anyone who cannot deal with someone who disagrees with them.

[Knight Hospitaller]

Originally Posted by Cro Burnham

There's a perpetual war on Christmas too.

At least on Christmas trees.

[Knight Hospitaller]

Originally Posted by allovertown

Misinformed right wing talking points don't make North Carolina's laws any less disgusting. Let's set aside the fact that the guys that are being told they can't use the women's room aren't "guys." The restroom issue is pretty easy to understand if you ignore the fear mongering tactics from the right.

But let's just ignore that whole debate because the most damaging part of the law is how it severely reduces equal protection under law for the LGBT community and creates the opportunity for LGBT community to be discriminated against without legal recourse.

Such a law is bigoted. It's supporters, bigots.

To call this debate political is absurd. Every American deserves equal protection under the law, it isn't a matter of political debate.

All I can say is that your diatribe speaks for itself. Debate is easy when you simply call the other fellow a misinformed bigot (and fail to recognize those things in your own words).

[Londonee]

Anyways, the notion that anyone would locate a processing/call center in a glimmering high rise is so stupid it's actually kind of funny.

Processing centers are located in massive, unglamorous ugly boxes with loads of parking - and located where real estate is especially cheap. If you've ever been to a comcast call/processing center you'll know that they are, in fact, the last ring of hell...

Now if PayPal is looking to locate a tech/innovation center on the east coast - in train shot of NYC, with affordable high-end real estate, and a slew of young college talent...then we're talking. (honestly, surprised we really haven't been able to attract more big companies based on these facts, right?)

[Cro Burnham]

Originally Posted by Londonee

If you've ever been to a . . . call/processing center you'll know that they are, in fact, the last ring of hell...

Now if PayPal is looking to locate a tech/innovation center . . . with affordable high-end real estate, and a slew of young college talent...then we're talking.

It would appear they are not, which would explain why they were looking at Charlotte (speaking of rings of hell).

[Knight Hospitaller]

Originally Posted by Cro Burnham

It would appear they are not, which would explain why they were looking at Charlotte (speaking of rings of hell).

One of the last places this "religious extremist" would want God to consign him, but they do have decent BBQ.

[allovertown]

Originally Posted by Knight Hospitaller

All I can say is that your diatribe speaks for itself. Debate is easy when you simply call the other fellow a misinformed bigot (and fail to recognize those things in your own words).

Sorry if you feel slighted but I will not engage in a debate over whether or not the LGBT community deserves equal protection under the law. Just as I would not engage in a debate over whether or not we should pass laws to curtail the rights of blacks, or Asians, or Christians for that matter.

I know it's hard for people like you because ever so recently it was perfectly acceptable to totally disregard the rights of a whole class of citizens. It's not any more. Deal with it.

[Knight Hospitaller]

Originally Posted by allovertown

Sorry if you feel slighted but I will not engage in a debate over whether or not the LGBT community deserves equal protection under the law. Just as I would not engage in a debate over whether or not we should pass laws to curtail the rights of blacks, or Asians, or Christians for that matter.

I know it's hard for people like you because ever so recently it was perfectly acceptable to totally disregard the rights of a whole class of citizens. It's not any more. Deal with it.

People like me? Have fun on your tirade. You seem to be having a fine shoutfest with yourself. You clearly know all the answers, so I suppose there's no need to have an open mind about the issues or your opponents. Just hating the "haters" is so simple.

[Cro Burnham]

Originally Posted by Knight Hospitaller

One of the last places this "religious extremist" would want God to consign him, but they do have decent BBQ.

Good BBQ is probably one of the few advantages of hell. Which explains a lot about the deep South.

[Cro Burnham]

Originally Posted by allovertown

Sorry if you feel slighted but I will not engage in a debate over whether or not the LGBT community deserves equal protection under the law. Just as I would not engage in a debate over whether or not we should pass laws to curtail the rights of blacks, or Asians, or Christians for that matter.

I know it's hard for people like you because ever so recently it was perfectly acceptable to totally disregard the rights of a whole class of citizens. It's not any more. Deal with it.

Obviously I pretty much fall on your side on all this, but I think a little of what KH is saying is that, e.g., he should have the right to express w/o being labeled a bigot the opinion that maybe biologically born women should not have to share bathrooms with trans-women. I kind of think there's a lot of silly scare-mongering associated with all that bathroom nonsense, and I understand the law has more far-reaching and serious civil rights implications than just bathroom usage restrictions. Not sure KH's arguments relating to that other stuff, and I imagine none of us want to discuss that here, but my interpretation that he feels it is not religious extremism to believe that biologically born women have the right to their own bathroom, that is "discussable" I perhaps. I don't really agree (or care that much honestly, we had co-ed bathrooms in my college dorms), but I can see how some folks would have a hard time that. I'm not trying to defend the point of view, but it seems to me you are both pretty reasonable people in a lot of respects and might actually have some common ground. But maybe not. I guess it doesn't really matter. It's just SSP after all.

[allovertown]

Originally Posted by Cro Burnham

Obviously I pretty much fall on your side on all this, but I think a little of what KH is saying is that, e.g., he should have the right to express w/o being labeled a bigot the opinion that maybe biologically born women should not have to share bathrooms with trans-women. I kind of think there's a lot of silly scare-mongering associated with all that bathroom nonsense, and I understand the law has more far-reaching and serious civil rights implications than just bathroom usage restrictions. Not sure KH's arguments relating to that other stuff, and I imagine none of us want to discuss that here, but my interpretation that he feels it is not religious extremism to believe that biologically born women have the right to their own bathroom, that is "discussable" I perhaps. I don't really agree (or care that much honestly, we had co-ed bathrooms in my college dorms), but I can see how some folks would have a hard time that. I'm not trying to defend the point of view, but it seems to me you are both pretty reasonable people in a lot of respects and might actually have some common ground. But maybe not. I guess it doesn't really matter. It's just SSP after all.

Yea probably coming across shittier than necessary. I do find KH reasonable on most topics and it really wasn't my intention to really get into this. I'm just frustrated that it's acceptable in this country to pass laws that target a minority group's ability to even hold employment and people dismissively make it out to be a political debate about bathrooms.

If he could be fired based on his gender or sexual identity I'm sure he wouldn't be so dismissive.