I've already explained it in previous posts. We're not going to agree. I think Taylor looks terrible here. You don't. We all have access to the information that has been made public and can make out own decisions about what we think about it..you seem to think you can change my opinion by berating me incessantly, but you just sound really overly defensive of him in a kind of bizarre way. |
A couple other options: - another recipient of the letter shared it with media - a poster who is not an “insider” questions the conclusion that Taylor shared it with the media We agree that a letter between the superintendent and the council is not itself a “public” statement, right? And by that I mean that it is available to the public if sought by a resident or media, but isn’t itself something intended for a public audience? |
Jesus what is wrong with you? Do you need help? Seriously, 988 is a great resource |
I have read the entire thread and see no post that indicates particular language that is inappropriate in “tone or content.” |
Other than insulting me personally, do you have a response that contributes to the discourse? |
It's not an insult. I genuinely think you are spiraling and need to take a breath. Because the way you are presenting yourself it is clear you are very invested in defending Taylor, and you are not making him look good at all. Stop, step away from your phone. |
Probably through a PIA request right? Because, the letter is legally subject to public disclosure - written by a public SERVANT to publicly elected officials - all taxpayer funded. |
LOL. That first letter was from McKnight's superintendency. Not the best justification for Taylor to use, but if that is where he is landing for an example to follow, I am not surprised. |
| Addressing a letter to "elected leaders of Montgomery County" is very vague and clearly should not carry the expectation of privacy. Letter sounded frustrated and catty and with the context Mink provided, flat out dishonest. |
Frustrated and catty...that is Taylor. |
Appreciate the advice. Do you agree that the two additional options I provided for why the letter is in the public sphere are plausible? |
Not likely PIA. That process takes much longer. It must have been either a sender or a recipient (or agent of) intentionally sending to the press. Mink had a lot more to fam from doing that than Taylor did. |
Because he sent a letter to all her colleagues that clearly referenced her actions without naming her. Everyone he addressed it to knew he was referring to her in several parts of the meandering letter. |
Everything any elected representative or government official sends is available to the public. As it should be. However, LOTS of correspondence goes back and forth between these people that is not directed at a public audience. This letter was sent to many “elected leaders” so it makes sense to lead off that way. The original assertion was that Taylor sent this letter somehow to the public, which was an indication of…something bad. Based on past practice, as evidenced by links in the letter itself, the letter itself was not that. Some seem to take issue with the “tone and content” which I would like to understand more. But that is a different issue. |
I want to make sure I understand, you agree it was likely Minke that made it “public” and not Taylor? (And thank you for understanding my typo in the PP!) |