Taylor's Feb Rec for Crown Boundary Study

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow Dufief, now I get the hate.
First it was calling people personally out by name and now it’s saying their kids are losers.

Fantastic examples of level-headed community advocacy. Keep up the great work. You all look wonderful in the community. A+!

The poster literally said they aren't in the Wootton cluster? Reading comprehension. But you're clearly not very smart.

lol his comment came a minute before. Can’t exactly read a comment that didn’t exist when I was responding.

But keep going with your name calling! You and the poster—who is a teacher that enjoys calling kids losers—would make such great friends.

Stay classy Dufief & friends.

Not Dufief. Try again.

Reading comprehension back at ya 😉
It’s Dufief & friends

But again love the doubling down for you.
“No I refuse to stay classy. I will continue to call minor children losers. I teach kids. It’s my right to call them losers.”

Are you parkway people really so self-absorbed that you can't imagine other parts of the county might take issue with what you are doing?

You can be from anywhere. I draw the line at adults— a teacher no less—name calling kids.

I don’t care where you stand on the boundary study.

I'm not the one who said that about the kids. And you're right- I could be from anywhere. So why is saying I must be from Dufief the default when I say something you disagree with? It's really weird.

Because they are grasping at straws.

First it was immediate legal threats.

Then it was threatening to vote out board members and politicians who didn't bow to them.

Then it was utilizing Magruder's more seriously problematic position as a front for their own interests.

Now that all those failed we're back to litigiousness and lashing out at specific communities to avoid what they don't want to occur. Nothing has stuck so far, so here's their Hail Mary.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow Dufief, now I get the hate.
First it was calling people personally out by name and now it’s saying their kids are losers.

Fantastic examples of level-headed community advocacy. Keep up the great work. You all look wonderful in the community. A+!

The poster literally said they aren't in the Wootton cluster? Reading comprehension. But you're clearly not very smart.

lol his comment came a minute before. Can’t exactly read a comment that didn’t exist when I was responding.

But keep going with your name calling! You and the poster—who is a teacher that enjoys calling kids losers—would make such great friends.

Stay classy Dufief & friends.

Not Dufief. Try again.

Reading comprehension back at ya 😉
It’s Dufief & friends

But again love the doubling down for you.
“No I refuse to stay classy. I will continue to call minor children losers. I teach kids. It’s my right to call them losers.”

Yup this is an unhealthy obsession. Dufief lives rent free in your head. Get help.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow Dufief, now I get the hate.
First it was calling people personally out by name and now it’s saying their kids are losers.

Fantastic examples of level-headed community advocacy. Keep up the great work. You all look wonderful in the community. A+!

The poster literally said they aren't in the Wootton cluster? Reading comprehension. But you're clearly not very smart.

lol his comment came a minute before. Can’t exactly read a comment that didn’t exist when I was responding.

But keep going with your name calling! You and the poster—who is a teacher that enjoys calling kids losers—would make such great friends.

Stay classy Dufief & friends.

Not Dufief. Try again.

Reading comprehension back at ya 😉
It’s Dufief & friends

But again love the doubling down for you.
“No I refuse to stay classy. I will continue to call minor children losers. I teach kids. It’s my right to call them losers.”

Are you parkway people really so self-absorbed that you can't imagine other parts of the county might take issue with what you are doing?

You can be from anywhere. I draw the line at adults— a teacher no less—name calling kids.

I don’t care where you stand on the boundary study.

I'm not the one who said that about the kids. And you're right- I could be from anywhere. So why is saying I must be from Dufief the default when I say something you disagree with? It's really weird.

Just like you are not the one who said that about the kids, I’m not the one who said you (or anyone) is from Dufief.

My only point is, there is no need to start saying someone’s kid is a loser.

I am genuinely shock that this thread is stooping this low.

At the end of the day, parents care about boundary studies (and other MCPS issues) because they care about their kids. We may have different opinions on what is best and why, but we are all here because we love and care about our kids.

So can we all agree to be adults and have conversations in a way that our kids would be proud of?

What the other poster said is just unacceptable. Full stop.

If they said that about a kid whose parents support option H or any other option, I wouldn’t stand for it either.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow Dufief, now I get the hate.
First it was calling people personally out by name and now it’s saying their kids are losers.

Fantastic examples of level-headed community advocacy. Keep up the great work. You all look wonderful in the community. A+!

The poster literally said they aren't in the Wootton cluster? Reading comprehension. But you're clearly not very smart.

lol his comment came a minute before. Can’t exactly read a comment that didn’t exist when I was responding.

But keep going with your name calling! You and the poster—who is a teacher that enjoys calling kids losers—would make such great friends.

Stay classy Dufief & friends.

Not Dufief. Try again.

Reading comprehension back at ya 😉
It’s Dufief & friends

But again love the doubling down for you.
“No I refuse to stay classy. I will continue to call minor children losers. I teach kids. It’s my right to call them losers.”

Are you parkway people really so self-absorbed that you can't imagine other parts of the county might take issue with what you are doing?

You can be from anywhere. I draw the line at adults— a teacher no less—name calling kids.

I don’t care where you stand on the boundary study.

I'm not the one who said that about the kids. And you're right- I could be from anywhere. So why is saying I must be from Dufief the default when I say something you disagree with? It's really weird.

Just like you are not the one who said that about the kids, I’m not the one who said you (or anyone) is from Dufief.

My only point is, there is no need to start saying someone’s kid is a loser.

I am genuinely shock that this thread is stooping this low.

At the end of the day, parents care about boundary studies (and other MCPS issues) because they care about their kids. We may have different opinions on what is best and why, but we are all here because we love and care about our kids.

So can we all agree to be adults and have conversations in a way that our kids would be proud of?

What the other poster said is just unacceptable. Full stop.

If they said that about a kid whose parents support option H or any other option, I wouldn’t stand for it either.

I agree with you but I should also say we have no confirmation that that person actually is a teacher. They could be making that up entirely. Looking at the discourse on this anonymous page, I would certainly not rule out that there are high schoolers here making comments. That's not to excuse bullying from children, but I think whoever anyone claims to be on this page needs to be taken with a grain of salt.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow Dufief, now I get the hate.
First it was calling people personally out by name and now it’s saying their kids are losers.

Fantastic examples of level-headed community advocacy. Keep up the great work. You all look wonderful in the community. A+!

The poster literally said they aren't in the Wootton cluster? Reading comprehension. But you're clearly not very smart.

lol his comment came a minute before. Can’t exactly read a comment that didn’t exist when I was responding.

But keep going with your name calling! You and the poster—who is a teacher that enjoys calling kids losers—would make such great friends.

Stay classy Dufief & friends.

Not Dufief. Try again.

Reading comprehension back at ya 😉
It’s Dufief & friends

But again love the doubling down for you.
“No I refuse to stay classy. I will continue to call minor children losers. I teach kids. It’s my right to call them losers.”

Are you parkway people really so self-absorbed that you can't imagine other parts of the county might take issue with what you are doing?

You can be from anywhere. I draw the line at adults— a teacher no less—name calling kids.

I don’t care where you stand on the boundary study.

I'm not the one who said that about the kids. And you're right- I could be from anywhere. So why is saying I must be from Dufief the default when I say something you disagree with? It's really weird.

Just like you are not the one who said that about the kids, I’m not the one who said you (or anyone) is from Dufief.

My only point is, there is no need to start saying someone’s kid is a loser.

I am genuinely shock that this thread is stooping this low.

At the end of the day, parents care about boundary studies (and other MCPS issues) because they care about their kids. We may have different opinions on what is best and why, but we are all here because we love and care about our kids.

So can we all agree to be adults and have conversations in a way that our kids would be proud of?

What the other poster said is just unacceptable. Full stop.

If they said that about a kid whose parents support option H or any other option, I wouldn’t stand for it either.

I agree with you but I should also say we have no confirmation that that person actually is a teacher. They could be making that up entirely. Looking at the discourse on this anonymous page, I would certainly not rule out that there are high schoolers here making comments. That's not to excuse bullying from children, but I think whoever anyone claims to be on this page needs to be taken with a grain of salt.

Good we agree on something 🙂. You are right, I don’t know if they are a teacher. But they can be a nurse, scientist, cashier, librarian, or astronaut, and even a high school student, still not cool to call someone’s kid a loser.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow Dufief, now I get the hate.
First it was calling people personally out by name and now it’s saying their kids are losers.

Fantastic examples of level-headed community advocacy. Keep up the great work. You all look wonderful in the community. A+!

The poster literally said they aren't in the Wootton cluster? Reading comprehension. But you're clearly not very smart.

lol his comment came a minute before. Can’t exactly read a comment that didn’t exist when I was responding.

But keep going with your name calling! You and the poster—who is a teacher that enjoys calling kids losers—would make such great friends.

Stay classy Dufief & friends.

Not Dufief. Try again.

Reading comprehension back at ya 😉
It’s Dufief & friends

But again love the doubling down for you.
“No I refuse to stay classy. I will continue to call minor children losers. I teach kids. It’s my right to call them losers.”

Are you parkway people really so self-absorbed that you can't imagine other parts of the county might take issue with what you are doing?

You can be from anywhere. I draw the line at adults— a teacher no less—name calling kids.

I don’t care where you stand on the boundary study.

I'm not the one who said that about the kids. And you're right- I could be from anywhere. So why is saying I must be from Dufief the default when I say something you disagree with? It's really weird.

Because they are grasping at straws.

First it was immediate legal threats.

Then it was threatening to vote out board members and politicians who didn't bow to them.

Then it was utilizing Magruder's more seriously problematic position as a front for their own interests.

Now that all those failed we're back to litigiousness and lashing out at specific communities to avoid what they don't want to occur. Nothing has stuck so far, so here's their Hail Mary.

Don't forget the brief moment where they were claiming issues of linguistic/cultural access despite the fact that relevant documents were circulated in Chinese and Vietnamese, and despite the fact that somehow the majority of survey responses came in English from the same GS-15 scientists they were claiming didn't speak English well enough to engage in the process.

[Anonymous]

A thought. I wouldn’t want anyone calling my kid or any kid a loser. It’s low but really the interpretation when one calls a kid a loser is that it’s the parents who are losers. The kid has been shaped by / learned it from somewhere - at home.

So maybe we just call the parent an a-hole loser instead? Just get right to the direct source of the issue. LOL

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow Dufief, now I get the hate.
First it was calling people personally out by name and now it’s saying their kids are losers.

Fantastic examples of level-headed community advocacy. Keep up the great work. You all look wonderful in the community. A+!

The poster literally said they aren't in the Wootton cluster? Reading comprehension. But you're clearly not very smart.

lol his comment came a minute before. Can’t exactly read a comment that didn’t exist when I was responding.

But keep going with your name calling! You and the poster—who is a teacher that enjoys calling kids losers—would make such great friends.

Stay classy Dufief & friends.

Not Dufief. Try again.

Reading comprehension back at ya 😉
It’s Dufief & friends

But again love the doubling down for you.
“No I refuse to stay classy. I will continue to call minor children losers. I teach kids. It’s my right to call them losers.”

Are you parkway people really so self-absorbed that you can't imagine other parts of the county might take issue with what you are doing?

You can be from anywhere. I draw the line at adults— a teacher no less—name calling kids.

I don’t care where you stand on the boundary study.

I'm not the one who said that about the kids. And you're right- I could be from anywhere. So why is saying I must be from Dufief the default when I say something you disagree with? It's really weird.

Just like you are not the one who said that about the kids, I’m not the one who said you (or anyone) is from Dufief.

My only point is, there is no need to start saying someone’s kid is a loser.

I am genuinely shock that this thread is stooping this low.

At the end of the day, parents care about boundary studies (and other MCPS issues) because they care about their kids. We may have different opinions on what is best and why, but we are all here because we love and care about our kids.

So can we all agree to be adults and have conversations in a way that our kids would be proud of?

What the other poster said is just unacceptable. Full stop.

If they said that about a kid whose parents support option H or any other option, I wouldn’t stand for it either.

I agree with you but I should also say we have no confirmation that that person actually is a teacher. They could be making that up entirely. Looking at the discourse on this anonymous page, I would certainly not rule out that there are high schoolers here making comments. That's not to excuse bullying from children, but I think whoever anyone claims to be on this page needs to be taken with a grain of salt.

Good we agree on something 🙂. You are right, I don’t know if they are a teacher. But they can be a nurse, scientist, cashier, librarian, or astronaut, and even a high school student, still not cool to call someone’s kid a loser.

I also agree with you. But I also think there’s many people on this thread who regularly talk disparagingly about Rosemont and FRES kids, implying they care less about academics or make worse choices than Wootton kids. It’s obviously subtler than the name calling happening here, but that doesn’t mean it’s not harmful (I would argue it’s more harmful as it’s not just happening in the cessspool that is this forum), and a lot of anti-h folks are either part of that discourse or simply holding their nose and continuing to ally themselves with the people contributing to it because they really want their kids to be able to walk to school. I completely agree with you that everyone on both sides of the argument truly care about their kids - but one side is regularly doing the exact type of harm that you are identifying as so problematic to another group of kids and taking no accountability for it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow Dufief, now I get the hate.
First it was calling people personally out by name and now it’s saying their kids are losers.

Fantastic examples of level-headed community advocacy. Keep up the great work. You all look wonderful in the community. A+!

The poster literally said they aren't in the Wootton cluster? Reading comprehension. But you're clearly not very smart.

lol his comment came a minute before. Can’t exactly read a comment that didn’t exist when I was responding.

But keep going with your name calling! You and the poster—who is a teacher that enjoys calling kids losers—would make such great friends.

Stay classy Dufief & friends.

Not Dufief. Try again.

Reading comprehension back at ya 😉
It’s Dufief & friends

But again love the doubling down for you.
“No I refuse to stay classy. I will continue to call minor children losers. I teach kids. It’s my right to call them losers.”

Are you parkway people really so self-absorbed that you can't imagine other parts of the county might take issue with what you are doing?

You can be from anywhere. I draw the line at adults— a teacher no less—name calling kids.

I don’t care where you stand on the boundary study.

I'm not the one who said that about the kids. And you're right- I could be from anywhere. So why is saying I must be from Dufief the default when I say something you disagree with? It's really weird.

Just like you are not the one who said that about the kids, I’m not the one who said you (or anyone) is from Dufief.

My only point is, there is no need to start saying someone’s kid is a loser.

I am genuinely shock that this thread is stooping this low.

At the end of the day, parents care about boundary studies (and other MCPS issues) because they care about their kids. We may have different opinions on what is best and why, but we are all here because we love and care about our kids.

So can we all agree to be adults and have conversations in a way that our kids would be proud of?

What the other poster said is just unacceptable. Full stop.

If they said that about a kid whose parents support option H or any other option, I wouldn’t stand for it either.

I agree with you but I should also say we have no confirmation that that person actually is a teacher. They could be making that up entirely. Looking at the discourse on this anonymous page, I would certainly not rule out that there are high schoolers here making comments. That's not to excuse bullying from children, but I think whoever anyone claims to be on this page needs to be taken with a grain of salt.

Good we agree on something 🙂. You are right, I don’t know if they are a teacher. But they can be a nurse, scientist, cashier, librarian, or astronaut, and even a high school student, still not cool to call someone’s kid a loser.

I also agree with you. But I also think there’s many people on this thread who regularly talk disparagingly about Rosemont and FRES kids, implying they care less about academics or make worse choices than Wootton kids. It’s obviously subtler than the name calling happening here, but that doesn’t mean it’s not harmful (I would argue it’s more harmful as it’s not just happening in the cessspool that is this forum), and a lot of anti-h folks are either part of that discourse or simply holding their nose and continuing to ally themselves with the people contributing to it because they really want their kids to be able to walk to school. I completely agree with you that everyone on both sides of the argument truly care about their kids - but one side is regularly doing the exact type of harm that you are identifying as so problematic to another group of kids and taking no accountability for it.

I’m the PP and 100% agree with what you said. I don’t have a problem with Fields Road or Rosemont. I’m happy to discuss my issues with the recommendation, though I’ve already posted my qualms before (but happy to do it again).

For any person to be implying that those kids are somehow less than, that’s mess up and also uncalled for. It genuinely has not been a part of the discourse I have personally been in. And if it were, I would’ve kindly told the person saying it to shut up.

[Anonymous]

Where’s the scorekeeper? Who is in the lead today on here?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Where’s the scorekeeper? Who is in the lead today on here?

The trash human calling kids losers: -1000
Anyone else: +1000

[Anonymous]

LOL at kids being ostracized years from now because parents disagree with boundary studies. I like H so 90% of the community is going to look down on my kid years from now? GMAFB. It's not that deep. Kim, there's people that are dying...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:LOL at kids being ostracized years from now because parents disagree with boundary studies. I like H so 90% of the community is going to look down on my kid years from now? GMAFB. It's not that deep. Kim, there's people that are dying...

It’s not. It was the pro H poster who first suggested that kids would be ostracized, which—I agree—is just wild.

The 90% was in response to that person.

I’m against H. But I’m not cool with calling kids losers or ostracizing kids.

If H is the chosen option, while I don’t agree, I would work toward building a close knit community.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:LOL at kids being ostracized years from now because parents disagree with boundary studies. I like H so 90% of the community is going to look down on my kid years from now? GMAFB. It's not that deep. Kim, there's people that are dying...

It’s not. It was the pro H poster who first suggested that kids would be ostracized, which—I agree—is just wild.

The 90% was in response to that person.

I’m against H. But I’m not cool with calling kids losers or ostracizing kids.

If H is the chosen option, while I don’t agree, I would work toward building a close knit community.

Also, correct me if I'm wrong but, even if H passes, wouldn't the current Wootton schools be in the majority? And also wouldn't they move into the building with all four grades while just 9th and 10th graders arrive from Fields Road/Rosemont?

So, if anything, DuFief/SMES/Lakewood/TES/Fallsmead will be setting the culture first and are unlikely to be the ones ostracized...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:LOL at kids being ostracized years from now because parents disagree with boundary studies. I like H so 90% of the community is going to look down on my kid years from now? GMAFB. It's not that deep. Kim, there's people that are dying...

It’s not. It was the pro H poster who first suggested that kids would be ostracized, which—I agree—is just wild.

The 90% was in response to that person.

I’m against H. But I’m not cool with calling kids losers or ostracizing kids.

If H is the chosen option, while I don’t agree, I would work toward building a close knit community.

Also, correct me if I'm wrong but, even if H passes, wouldn't the current Wootton schools be in the majority? And also wouldn't they move into the building with all four grades while just 9th and 10th graders arrive from Fields Road/Rosemont?

So, if anything, DuFief/SMES/Lakewood/TES/Fallsmead will be setting the culture first and are unlikely to be the ones ostracized...

PP here. Very reassuring to here this viewpoint. I think community building will be more important than ever. I have a lot of concerns about the amount of awfulness being thrown at Dufief right now from the parkway parents. if not for that I would agree with you.