tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3033288879708780106.post142648133293101699..comments2023-04-07T05:19:44.951-04:00Comments on Yes Vermont Yankee: Green Mountain Daily and MeMeredith Angwinhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02737538041807740424noreply@blogger.comBlogger10125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3033288879708780106.post-76958145214615199132010-07-26T02:44:52.364-04:002010-07-26T02:44:52.364-04:00Hi Meredith
Your reply was both needed and well d...Hi Meredith<br /><br />Your reply was both needed and well done. Fear Uncertainty and Doubt (FUD) play to the benefit of those complaining about something. Failure to address those issues leaves swing voters at least hesitant to be involved. This is a battle with a real win-loss effect. The plant will shut down or continue to provide electricity. <br /><br />The object of lying about you is not personal - but political, cause hesitation for those who would support your position. Yes, VY produces wonderful electricity but according to many people so will wind, waves and sunlight. Non-technical people will not be able to discern what the difference is, but having a vocal advocate who is NOT paid, will swing them in support. Your integrity matters.Davidnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3033288879708780106.post-26787373588559582572010-07-18T09:24:38.203-04:002010-07-18T09:24:38.203-04:00Karen, Kit and G Murphy
Thank you and I agree wit...Karen, Kit and G Murphy<br /><br />Thank you and I agree with all of you. Actually, I agree most strongly with Kit. If you remember, my first reaction was not to answer at all. Some of the charges were so ridiculous: "we portray ourselves as independent concerned citizens." We ARE independent concerned citizens, but we also portray ourselves as pro-nuclear advocates. Words to that effect are on our profiles, and our profiles are visible on every blog post.<br /><br />I'm still not sure if I should have answered this. The option I thought of first, was...ignore it. But friends suggested this was a bad idea, and frankly, It is hard to be lied about in print and make no response. I hope I haven't gotten myself into a bind, here, though. There are a ton more important things to blog about VY. As Kit says, the real story is how much power it produces for our state and neighboring states! <br /><br />And one of the problems of answering is simple: let's say she comes back with an even more outrageous attack: "Meredith and Rod not only are paid BIG BUCKS, but they LIE about it and they MURDERED THEIR GRANDMOTHERS!"<br /><br />If I don't answer the new charges, she will crow that I have no answer, she finally found the real dirt. If I do answer, I will be involved in a mudslinging contest that will take my time, energy and perhaps most important, blog space. <br /><br />Whatever she says next, I think this post has to be the end of it, for me.Meredith Angwinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02737538041807740424noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3033288879708780106.post-64946254254484719952010-07-18T05:29:11.676-04:002010-07-18T05:29:11.676-04:00I really hate to give ideas to the other side, but...I really hate to give ideas to the other side, but like you, I like to play the "here's what they'll try next" game. <br /><br />After your spirited ( and 100% righteous) defense of your integrity, you can expect the Gundersen howlers to start calling you an "Industry shill".<br /><br />The very word "shill" has a shrill slang menace to it, and even those ignorant of its dictionary meaning can instinctively surmise what it means, imagining some cigar-smoking , unkempt, greasy-faced fat guy wearing arm-garters and a gambler's green eyeshade, trying to convince 12-year-olds to buy some alcoholic laudanum-laced potion at a carnival somewhere, all to help the other greasy fat guys down at Entergy central, in the Tennessee Williams neighborhood of New Orleans.<br /><br />"Shill" is such a powerful weapon, just on its sound alone, that the howlers who hurl it won't even have to know anything. In fact "Shill" substitutes for a reasonable argument, and permanently renders the honest words of an innocent speaker into strontium laced lies, direct from Jay Thayer.<br /><br />Its the cult of demonization at work, with its most powerful juju spell.<br /><br />There have been others through the centuries...<br /><br />Slave...kaffir...schwartze...juden.....n*gger<br /><br /><br /><br /><br />http://www.yourdictionary.com/shill<br /><br />shill (s̸hil)<br />1.the confederate of a gambler, pitchman, auctioneer, etc. who pretends to buy, bet, or bid so as to lure onlookers into participating<br />2. a person who works energetically to sell or promote something<br /><br /><br />I have the greatest admiration for your principled stance. However, expect the mudslinging to get worse....it will.<br /><br /><br />G.MurphyFEED BURNERhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12801933848163990121noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3033288879708780106.post-62595784459261667602010-07-17T20:21:45.082-04:002010-07-17T20:21:45.082-04:00Re pay vs working for the public, I just spent tim...Re pay vs working for the public, I just spent time today typing up quotes from the excellent Risk and Culture by Douglas and Wildavsky. From page 169,<br /><br />The label “public interest group” is more than merely convenient; it is also flattering. It suggests that these groups are pure (their interests are public, open, and shared) in contrast to other groups presumed to be impure (behind their public advocacy lies their privates interests). Each claims to place general public interests, such as health, safety, and proper procedure above particular private interests. This elevation serves them well. At once they are able to disclaim selfish motives, such as direct pecuniary gain, while advancing policies to use public money upon what Inglehart would call their postmaterial preferences. Whether the seeking of power, status, leadership, and personal visibility belongs to a higher moral plane than seeking better wages and profits we do not judge; but on a principle we challenge clams to extra holiness.Karen Streethttp://pathsoflight.us/musing/index.phpnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3033288879708780106.post-53948178148086338382010-07-17T18:21:09.673-04:002010-07-17T18:21:09.673-04:00I will be happy to confirm that neither Meredith o...I will be happy to confirm that neither Meredith or Ron Adams are not nuclear professionals. This not intended as insult just a fact. <br /><br />Nuclear professionals understand that we are fairly held to a high standard for operating nuke plants. It does not matter how other industries do things. TMI and Chernobyl are examples of avoidable events that remind us of the need for those high standards. <br /><br />Keeping talking about the excellence of nuclear plant performance. Avoid the temptation to fight unimportant battles. There is great story of improving performance. Meredith is correcting the record about something that really does not matter and not talking about how much electricity VY is producing today.<br /><br />Anti-nukes like personal attacks. Do not play that game.KitPnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3033288879708780106.post-66916391899343619832010-07-16T21:32:36.519-04:002010-07-16T21:32:36.519-04:00Hello Jason, Edward, Greg and donb,
Thank you fo...Hello Jason, Edward, Greg and donb,<br /><br />Thank you for the support!<br /><br />I wanted to add a few words about commenting at Green Mountain versus posting on my own blog. <br /> <br />First, I agree with donb, and I could have started a new account under a different name and commented on the Green Mountain site.<br /><br />However, that would have been a certain amount of trouble. Also, if you look at the comments on my post about the strontium in the fish (It's the Nukes What Gets the Blame), you see that one of my readers tried to post at Green Mountain without success. Furthermore, after Gundersen's latest post went up, another person emailed me that they had tried to post a rebuttal at Green Mountain, also without success. <br /><br />Therefore, attempting to comment at Green Mountain looked like a poor use of my time. I would need to start a new email account, but posting to the site still might not happen.<br /><br />More important, perhaps, is Greg's note. Greg is right. The requirement to have an account before posting discourages people from posting, and limits diversity of opinion on the site.Meredith Angwinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02737538041807740424noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3033288879708780106.post-13457706681640016242010-07-16T10:20:59.420-04:002010-07-16T10:20:59.420-04:00Meredith Angwin wrote:
My second idea was to answe...Meredith Angwin wrote:<br /><i>My second idea was to answer the statements by leaving a comment on the Green Mountain Daily site. Unfortunately, you have to create an account on that site in order to post a comment. In other words, you have to give Green Mountain Daily your email address, get a password, etc.</i><br /><br />You can always open an e-mail account on Yahoo, Google, etc, and use it to sign up for the Green Mountain Daily site. If you start getting too much unwanted trash, you can then just shut it down, or ignore it for a month to two after which time it goes away by itself.donbnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3033288879708780106.post-75708813312345764432010-07-16T09:39:29.442-04:002010-07-16T09:39:29.442-04:00Excellent work taking Maggie Gundersen to task poi...Excellent work taking Maggie Gundersen to task point by point. It's easy to make lazy and casual assumptions that align to bias, and it seems that's all Maggie did.<br /><br />Regarding registered accounts: From a UX (User Experience) perspective signing up for an account only makes sense in the context of whether or not a user has value and incentive of returning and participating in a site (i.e. Facebook or Twitter). On this fundamental principle alone I think it is generally a poor decision for blogs because it eliminates most potential counter points from ever occurring in the comments. And what use is that? As you explained Meredith, what user wants to sign up for a site they really do not care for?<br /><br />Keep fighting the good fight.Greg Molyneuxhttp://httpnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3033288879708780106.post-46430383994594354952010-07-16T09:39:29.441-04:002010-07-16T09:39:29.441-04:00Excellent post!Excellent post!Edward Keehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04146041907060605921noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3033288879708780106.post-61789159702137649942010-07-16T03:20:24.510-04:002010-07-16T03:20:24.510-04:00Great post Meredith. It should also be noted that ...Great post Meredith. It should also be noted that sourcewatch.com is not an objective source of information AT ALL. Anyone can create an account on that site and say anything. In fact, because it is open to everyone, the site has degraded into a soap box platform for all kinds of groups to smear one another. <br /><br />Here's my disclaimer. I think I've made a total of $80.00 selling a few t-shirts and mouse pads with a design I created that says "Real Environmentalists Support Nuclear Energy" from the blog. If I wanted make money with a blog I should have chosen to write about celebrities. Silly me.Jason Ribeirohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06863185203119704249noreply@blogger.com