Schools cause PoP to leave Petworth

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:In the other PoP thread, someone said that I had Dan's back (that would apparently be a bad thing). He would probably vehemently disagree with that suggestion given the crap that has been spewed about him here. Nevertheless, I do want everyone to be cautious about dissecting someone's personal financial affairs. Even public figures deserve a modicum of privacy.

its always been particularly fascinating and yet disgusting to me the way that folks will dissect the hell out another person's money. it never occurs to me to care.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:He didn't name names, but it doesn't take a genius to figure it out. It's not surprising that the public face of gentrification gets a little closer examination.

Well, he IS a -- if not THE -- public face of gentrification in D.C.; and because he runs a community blog with his royal name on it, he is a public figure who is subject to comment on just about any subject in relation to what he symbolizes. For example, if you're offended by criticism or scrutiny of the Kardashians, then it would be consistent of you to be offended by criticism of the PoP. But, I'd hazard to say, most of y'all being appalled at the content of this forum are being a bit hypocritical.

[Anonymous]

Dan featured Powell on his blog a few times:

http://www.popville.com/2013/02/pop-ed-underrated-dcps-school-powell-elementary/

http://www.popville.com/2014/03/president-obama-visiting-powell-elementary-on-upshur-street-this-morning/

http://www.popville.com/2011/03/dear-pop-powell-elementary-students-planting-trees/

http://www.popville.com/2010/08/the-5pm-post-powell-elementary-adopted-by-the-capitals/

The only thing he ever posted about Bruce Monroe was the demolition of the original school:

http://www.popville.com/2010/02/dear-pop-more-info-on-bruce-monroe-school-demolition/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:In the other PoP thread, someone said that I had Dan's back (that would apparently be a bad thing). He would probably vehemently disagree with that suggestion given the crap that has been spewed about him here. Nevertheless, I do want everyone to be cautious about dissecting someone's personal financial affairs. Even public figures deserve a modicum of privacy.

its always been particularly fascinating and yet disgusting to me the way that folks will dissect the hell out another person's money. it never occurs to me to care.

PP here Agreed and it wasn't my intention. Just addressing some factually challenged notions that real estate is akin to Monopoly

I honestly believe it's no one's business why he moved which is why it's strange to publicly state in WP and a widely read blog that it's because of schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe he sold because he realized that Petworth is at the height of the market now. Cash out, plain and simple.

Correct, PoP bought in 2003 for 207k. Sold for 700k. Sitting on about a half-mil in profit.

http://www.zillow.com/homedetails/4110-4th-St-NW-W...shington-DC-20011/485208_zpid/

You don't seriously think that 12 years of depreciation and inflation results in a true 1/2 mil in profit? If so, I have some timeshares in Fl. I'd like to sell you.

economists...

Seriously. When I say a half-mil in profit, i really meant a half-mil in his POCKET...depending on how much he may have borrowed against the house to do work on it, etc.

ok -- so ignore the fact that 2015 dollars are worth less than 2003 dollars. Ignore the cost of maintenance, upkeep and improvements. Ignore opportunity costs of money tied up in acquisition costs.

You still need to close on a property and most likely pay commission on the $700K. As a buyer there were settlement costs too. Not to mention anything else purchased has appreciated along with the original house. That's not even remotely near $1/2 mil.

so seriously, I'll fly you down and put you up for the weekend. . . all you have to do is sit through a brief marketing presentation. . .

I'm familiar with how finances work. I've lived in my house for 6 years and put plenty of money into it in terms of upgrade and maintenance. And I've taken plenty in deductions on my taxes. But if I sell it for 700K tomorrow, and my original mortgage was 200k (assuming it was in the heady days of 0% down), when I'm finished with my sale, I"m leaving the settlement table with something around $500K coming my way. Assuming I haven't put myself into debt to stay in my current place, that is a nice chunk of cash to put down on my next house.

would you mind sharing contacts for your realtor, settlement company, and real property officer who provides so much free service? Or the magic raygun that counters the economic reality that 2015 dollars are less valuable than 2003 ones

$1/2 mil is not that much to put towards houses in upper NW btw unless you can pay out a substantial nut on a jumbo mortgage. Don't really see it for bloggers, but don't know what Princess of Petworth does to earn a living.

You really are a stickler for details, huh? I don't know why I keep going here. But look - if you got a 5% mortgage in 2003 with 0% down, your loan payoff today would be something like $150k. When you sell your place for 700, taking out transfer taxes, closing costs and commissions (which total about 50k) and loan payoff, you're looking at 500k cut in a check to you. Yes, there's opportunity cost and maintenance, etc. But those are effectively sunk costs. Inflation is inflation - our dollars today are worth less, but that applies to both assets and debts. And I'm done.

[Anonymous]

I have only read Popville the last few years.

I will note

A. It is now called Popville, not Prince of Petworth as it is about all of DC, not just Petworth, and the word "prince" is no longer in the title.

B. It not only covers gentrifying EOTP neighborhoods, but covers restaurants, RE, pretty pictures, etc from WOTP neighborhood. He may once have been the face of EOTP gentrification, and he still covers it extensively, but that is not all he covers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I have only read Popville the last few years.

I will note

A. It is now called Popville, not Prince of Petworth as it is about all of DC, not just Petworth, and the word "prince" is no longer in the title.

B. It not only covers gentrifying EOTP neighborhoods, but covers restaurants, RE, pretty pictures, etc from WOTP neighborhood. He may once have been the face of EOTP gentrification, and he still covers it extensively, but that is not all he covers.

Then he should have re-named it DoCville, if the site's its purpose is as you contend. Would have made more sense. As a community blog, he might also have considered allowing all of the community to comment in it, instead of policing it like a mod from the schutzstaffel.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe he sold because he realized that Petworth is at the height of the market now. Cash out, plain and simple.

Correct, PoP bought in 2003 for 207k. Sold for 700k. Sitting on about a half-mil in profit.

http://www.zillow.com/homedetails/4110-4th-St-NW-W...shington-DC-20011/485208_zpid/

You don't seriously think that 12 years of depreciation and inflation results in a true 1/2 mil in profit? If so, I have some timeshares in Fl. I'd like to sell you.

economists...

Seriously. When I say a half-mil in profit, i really meant a half-mil in his POCKET...depending on how much he may have borrowed against the house to do work on it, etc.

ok -- so ignore the fact that 2015 dollars are worth less than 2003 dollars. Ignore the cost of maintenance, upkeep and improvements. Ignore opportunity costs of money tied up in acquisition costs.

You still need to close on a property and most likely pay commission on the $700K. As a buyer there were settlement costs too. Not to mention anything else purchased has appreciated along with the original house. That's not even remotely near $1/2 mil.

so seriously, I'll fly you down and put you up for the weekend. . . all you have to do is sit through a brief marketing presentation. . .

I'm familiar with how finances work. I've lived in my house for 6 years and put plenty of money into it in terms of upgrade and maintenance. And I've taken plenty in deductions on my taxes. But if I sell it for 700K tomorrow, and my original mortgage was 200k (assuming it was in the heady days of 0% down), when I'm finished with my sale, I"m leaving the settlement table with something around $500K coming my way. Assuming I haven't put myself into debt to stay in my current place, that is a nice chunk of cash to put down on my next house.

would you mind sharing contacts for your realtor, settlement company, and real property officer who provides so much free service? Or the magic raygun that counters the economic reality that 2015 dollars are less valuable than 2003 ones

$1/2 mil is not that much to put towards houses in upper NW btw unless you can pay out a substantial nut on a jumbo mortgage. Don't really see it for bloggers, but don't know what Princess of Petworth does to earn a living.

You really are a stickler for details, huh? I don't know why I keep going here. But look - if you got a 5% mortgage in 2003 with 0% down, your loan payoff today would be something like $150k. When you sell your place for 700, taking out transfer taxes, closing costs and commissions (which total about 50k) and loan payoff, you're looking at 500k cut in a check to you. Yes, there's opportunity cost and maintenance, etc. But those are effectively sunk costs. Inflation is inflation - our dollars today are worth less, but that applies to both assets and debts. And I'm done.

If anyone is still paying % commission they are crazy. There are plenty of set price fees for selling a house ~10,000.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have only read Popville the last few years.

I will note

A. It is now called Popville, not Prince of Petworth as it is about all of DC, not just Petworth, and the word "prince" is no longer in the title.

B. It not only covers gentrifying EOTP neighborhoods, but covers restaurants, RE, pretty pictures, etc from WOTP neighborhood. He may once have been the face of EOTP gentrification, and he still covers it extensively, but that is not all he covers.

Then he should have re-named it DoCville, if the site's its purpose is as you contend. Would have made more sense. As a community blog, he might also have considered allowing all of the community to comment in it, instead of policing it like a mod from the schutzstaffel.

The name popville connected to the old name (marketing, you know) but also removed Petworth from the name. And it is his blog, and he is free to moderate it as he sees fit. If you do not like the moderation policy, there is no shortage of alternate blogs. Unlike many other businesses, the barriers to entry in blogging are pretty low.

However it remains popular. WHich suggests either the moderation policy doesn't really matter to most, or that the benefits of being troll free exceed the costs of the occasional arbitrary deletion.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have only read Popville the last few years.

I will note

A. It is now called Popville, not Prince of Petworth as it is about all of DC, not just Petworth, and the word "prince" is no longer in the title.

B. It not only covers gentrifying EOTP neighborhoods, but covers restaurants, RE, pretty pictures, etc from WOTP neighborhood. He may once have been the face of EOTP gentrification, and he still covers it extensively, but that is not all he covers.

Then he should have re-named it DoCville, if the site's its purpose is as you contend. Would have made more sense. As a community blog, he might also have considered allowing all of the community to comment in it, instead of policing it like a mod from the schutzstaffel.

The name popville connected to the old name (marketing, you know) but also removed Petworth from the name. And it is his blog, and he is free to moderate it as he sees fit. If you do not like the moderation policy, there is no shortage of alternate blogs. Unlike many other businesses, the barriers to entry in blogging are pretty low.

However it remains popular. WHich suggests either the moderation policy doesn't really matter to most, or that the benefits of being troll free exceed the costs of the occasional arbitrary deletion.

but deleted comments are often not trolling but simple difference of opinion even respectfully stated. THAT's what rubs people the wrong way. I get keeping the jerk quotient low but it's lame to wipe posts because someone challenges your POV or merely disagrees

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have only read Popville the last few years.

I will note

A. It is now called Popville, not Prince of Petworth as it is about all of DC, not just Petworth, and the word "prince" is no longer in the title.

B. It not only covers gentrifying EOTP neighborhoods, but covers restaurants, RE, pretty pictures, etc from WOTP neighborhood. He may once have been the face of EOTP gentrification, and he still covers it extensively, but that is not all he covers.

Then he should have re-named it DoCville, if the site's its purpose is as you contend. Would have made more sense. As a community blog, he might also have considered allowing all of the community to comment in it, instead of policing it like a mod from the schutzstaffel.

The name popville connected to the old name (marketing, you know) but also removed Petworth from the name. And it is his blog, and he is free to moderate it as he sees fit. If you do not like the moderation policy, there is no shortage of alternate blogs. Unlike many other businesses, the barriers to entry in blogging are pretty low.

However it remains popular. WHich suggests either the moderation policy doesn't really matter to most, or that the benefits of being troll free exceed the costs of the occasional arbitrary deletion.

but deleted comments are often not trolling but simple difference of opinion even respectfully stated. THAT's what rubs people the wrong way. I get keeping the jerk quotient low but it's lame to wipe posts because someone challenges your POV or merely disagrees

I did not say all the deleted comments were trolls. But PopVille compared to some other local blogs, has both fewer trolls, and more deleted comments in general, I suppose someone could start a DC focused blog that has as much material as PopVille does, and mod to stop trolling, but allow more freedom of expression. You are of course free to try that yourself. Meanwhile the only thing lamer than some blogs' mod policies, is people who go around complaining about blog mod policies. First World Problem.

[Anonymous]

There is nothing lame about tweaking the nose of a super-anal mod. Super-anal mods deserve all the flack they get, as they are not really moderating, but controlling. In comparison, Jeff steps in, reminds the jerks they are being a-holes, which has the effect of moderating the a-holery of the jerks, without actually deleting them. That's what a REAL mod does, especially one who cares about freedom of expression and appreciates an open forum.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There is nothing lame about tweaking the nose of a super-anal mod. Super-anal mods deserve all the flack they get, as they are not really moderating, but controlling. In comparison, Jeff steps in, reminds the jerks they are being a-holes, which has the effect of moderating the a-holery of the jerks, without actually deleting them. That's what a REAL mod does, especially one who cares about freedom of expression and appreciates an open forum.

This

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There is nothing lame about tweaking the nose of a super-anal mod. Super-anal mods deserve all the flack they get, as they are not really moderating, but controlling. In comparison, Jeff steps in, reminds the jerks they are being a-holes, which has the effect of moderating the a-holery of the jerks, without actually deleting them. That's what a REAL mod does, especially one who cares about freedom of expression and appreciates an open forum.

The long running series of complaints here, including the discussion of "freedom of expression" is not tweaking. Tweaking would be quick, and it would be funny. The complaints here are neither.

By the way, I do not think you understand how freedom of expression works. It means that JS, DS, you, me, anyone has the right to start their own blog and moderate however they want - anally, reasonably, free for all, or whatever. The BLOG is the expression, and the choice to even allow comments, is just that, the blogger's choice.

BTW, this place frequently has good threads fall apart into assholery, on a range of subjects. I do not complain, because, once again, it is Jeff's blog, to do as he likes with.

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:There is nothing lame about tweaking the nose of a super-anal mod. Super-anal mods deserve all the flack they get, as they are not really moderating, but controlling. In comparison, Jeff steps in, reminds the jerks they are being a-holes, which has the effect of moderating the a-holery of the jerks, without actually deleting them. That's what a REAL mod does, especially one who cares about freedom of expression and appreciates an open forum.

In the interests of full disclosure, I delete posts as well. I also get flack for deleting them, but that goes with the territory so I don't really mind. Posters in this thread seem pretty pleased with me but there are plenty of threads in which posters think I suck. Everyone has their own perspective.