It's interesting that the editors delete posts that call those that make slanderous comments out. I did it in regards to "Robert" on another thread and yet it has "disappeared." Why editors? why?

Editor's note: After I removed the Robert accusations or innuendos, I removed subsequent posts that referred to them. - Richard Hine

@Peter

You can add me to the list of posters that will no longer tolerate this inappropriate behavior.

Peter, we have watched some behavior and comments that NOE of these people would/will do if they signed their names. Their parents would be AGHAST to see what their offspring say in public.

Count me in Peter.

Roy Thiele-Sardina

I found one of my posts was deleted in Martin Lemarque's blog. It was my comment to "follow the evidence" that IMO did not follow the evidence. I don't know if an editor removed it or if Martin did. My guess is the latter - because it didn't have the nice bolded "Editor's note" and it also cast doubt on my veracity.

Here was my reply ---

________________

Interesting -- one of comments has been removed. Why?

Here is the comment left behind ---

"Comment removed.

This person has been posting comments under at least 4 different aliases.

I wonder if he works for that famous consultant."

I'll answer your accusatory question -- no. I don't work for anybody. I'm a self employed electronics consultant specializing in semiconductor circuits that require deep modeling expertise. I've been in the electronics field for about 4 decades in many roles. I don't do political consulting - nor do I know Malcolm Smith.

Regarding aliases - as a registered user only one. I'm a relative newbie to posting on the Almanac -- Measure M got me going. My progression of aliases is as follows as an unregistered user "undecided on M" -> "formerly undecided on M" -> as a registered user "formerly formerly". I thought that was kind of funny.

My post had to do with the 51.25 hours that Malcolm Smith charged the city for at $100/hour - so 51.25 hours over a period of 4 months. Based on my experiences designing websites (not professionally - but as a favor) for friends and family - and looking at the overall design of the 7 pages Malcolm Smith created for the city, the links to supporting material - the research to generate the verbiage -- as well as estimating the editorial review with city stakeholders - it seems like a reasonable week of work.

Fair enough so far?

The post I was referring to by "follow the evidence" only considered the 5 pdfs of the drafts that the city released last week - and not the work that went into the website - which seemed to be a much larger endeavor.

Any other questions?

I want to know why my post was pulled - and why aspersions were cast on my motivations.

Regards,