Anonymous wrote:People ask me why I’m so hostile to so-called affordable housing.

This is why. This school. This fight. This incident at Outdoor Lab. That’s why I hate AHC, APAH, and all the so-called do glider SJWs who stick us with dangerous kids. No thanks. Put those kids into evening school and let real kids get an education without worrying about running into those kids and parents like these Oakridge fighters.

Right, because rich, white kids and parents are always so well behaved.

Anonymous wrote:People ask me why I’m so hostile to so-called affordable housing.

This is why. This school. This fight. This incident at Outdoor Lab. That’s why I hate AHC, APAH, and all the so-called do glider SJWs who stick us with dangerous kids. No thanks. Put those kids into evening school and let real kids get an education without worrying about running into those kids and parents like these Oakridge fighters.

Real kids? That’s fun.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People ask me why I’m so hostile to so-called affordable housing.

This is why. This school. This fight. This incident at Outdoor Lab. That’s why I hate AHC, APAH, and all the so-called do glider SJWs who stick us with dangerous kids. No thanks. Put those kids into evening school and let real kids get an education without worrying about running into those kids and parents like these Oakridge fighters.

Why do I get the feeling that this poster attends church every Sunday, yet never grasps the irony?

Have you yourself ever attended a local housing advocacy meeting? Religious groups (including local churches) are leaders in this space.

Anonymous wrote:People ask me why I’m so hostile to so-called affordable housing.

This is why. This school. This fight. This incident at Outdoor Lab. That’s why I hate AHC, APAH, and all the so-called do glider SJWs who stick us with dangerous kids. No thanks. Put those kids into evening school and let real kids get an education without worrying about running into those kids and parents like these Oakridge fighters.

Why do I get the feeling that this poster attends church every Sunday, yet never grasps the irony?

Anonymous wrote:People ask me why I’m so hostile to so-called affordable housing.

This is why. This school. This fight. This incident at Outdoor Lab. That’s why I hate AHC, APAH, and all the so-called do glider SJWs who stick us with dangerous kids. No thanks. Put those kids into evening school and let real kids get an education without worrying about running into those kids and parents like these Oakridge fighters.

I understand your rant. Sorry for your loss Mrs. Kaczynski.

Anonymous wrote:People ask me why I’m so hostile to so-called affordable housing.

This is why. This school. This fight. This incident at Outdoor Lab. That’s why I hate AHC, APAH, and all the so-called do glider SJWs who stick us with dangerous kids. No thanks. Put those kids into evening school and let real kids get an education without worrying about running into those kids and parents like these Oakridge fighters.

Are you okay?

People ask me why I’m so hostile to so-called affordable housing.

This is why. This school. This fight. This incident at Outdoor Lab. That’s why I hate AHC, APAH, and all the so-called do glider SJWs who stick us with dangerous kids. No thanks. Put those kids into evening school and let real kids get an education without worrying about running into those kids and parents like these Oakridge fighters.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Someone said this on the locked thread, and I have a question….

It was awful, but there is a backstory and I'm actually more interested in accountability for the way the school handled what led to the situation. I'd like that much more than public shaming those involved. I'm so disappointed with the school and I can't wait to be done with it. Also let's hear it for the elementary school teachers who broke up a fight! Sheesh, I bet that wasn't on their 2023 bingo card.

What did the school do wrong?

If there is was a significant back story that the school knew about, then they should have ensured the parents were nowhere near each other. Or maybe talked to each of them about NOT provoking each other. Obviously adults should be adults, but depending on whatever the backstory is (and clearly it was quite significant since it led to a fight), there should have been some planning by the school[b].

Disagree. Absolutely not the APS administration’s role (or any other school) to keep adults from physically assaulting one another. How can that possibly be? They are in charge of administering our children’s education. No one pays them enough to also keep adults from committing crimes.

It seems it was pretty easy to anticipate that the event would be volatile. But if you as Principal arrange for security at the promotion event, then you’re acknowledging that there is something that has happened on your watch that has led to this tension. The better route for a principal looking to downplay issues is to hope nothing happens.

It’s interesting that just one party was named. Was Gonzalez’s kid the victim at Outdoor Lab? A perpetrator? Same questions with the unnamed party. Was that person the victim of assault here, and the person’s kid the victim at Outdoor Lab? Or much worse, was this victim’s kid a perpetrator at Outdoor Lab.

If the Oakridge principal really has been keeping a lid on problems, this is going to be tough to navigate. Events like these get people asking unwelcome questions.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Someone said this on the locked thread, and I have a question….

It was awful, but there is a backstory and I'm actually more interested in accountability for the way the school handled what led to the situation. I'd like that much more than public shaming those involved. I'm so disappointed with the school and I can't wait to be done with it. Also let's hear it for the elementary school teachers who broke up a fight! Sheesh, I bet that wasn't on their 2023 bingo card.

What did the school do wrong?

If there is was a significant back story that the school knew about, then they should have ensured the parents were nowhere near each other. Or maybe talked to each of them about NOT provoking each other. Obviously adults should be adults, but depending on whatever the backstory is (and clearly it was quite significant since it led to a fight), there should have been some planning by the school[b].

Disagree. Absolutely not the APS administration’s role (or any other school) to keep adults from physically assaulting one another. How can that possibly be? They are in charge of administering our children’s education. No one pays them enough to also keep adults from committing crimes.

Anonymous wrote:Someone said this on the locked thread, and I have a question….

It was awful, but there is a backstory and I'm actually more interested in accountability for the way the school handled what led to the situation. I'd like that much more than public shaming those involved. I'm so disappointed with the school and I can't wait to be done with it. Also let's hear it for the elementary school teachers who broke up a fight! Sheesh, I bet that wasn't on their 2023 bingo card.

What did the school do wrong?

If there is was a significant back story that the school knew about, then they should have ensured the parents were nowhere near each other. Or maybe talked to each of them about NOT provoking each other. Obviously adults should be adults, but depending on whatever the backstory is (and clearly it was quite significant since it led to a fight), there should have been some planning by the school.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wouldn’t public shaming of the adult also subject their kid(s) to ridicule?

Parents who use their kids as shields to not be publicly named, SHOULD be shamed.

I think the problem here, if we’re to agree with some of the inferences made, is that identifying the parents is tantamount to identifying the children involved in a case of inappropriate touching, and presumably one of those children is a victim. It’s not even remotely in that child’s interest to have his or her identity publicly known and protecting that privacy is more important than naming the parent who got in a scuffle at the promotion ceremony.

How are you certain the fight is related to the Outdoor Lab incident?

In any case, the parents involved in the fight should be banned from APS properties moving forward.

Oh, I’m not! It’s something that was suggested upthread. I imagine it was something pretty significant that provoked the fight if it resulted in a physical altercation in this setting.

Sounds like Jerry Springer to me. Maybe a shared baby daddy.

It was related to the outdoor lab assault

How do you know?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wouldn’t public shaming of the adult also subject their kid(s) to ridicule?

Parents who use their kids as shields to not be publicly named, SHOULD be shamed.

I think the problem here, if we’re to agree with some of the inferences made, is that identifying the parents is tantamount to identifying the children involved in a case of inappropriate touching, and presumably one of those children is a victim. It’s not even remotely in that child’s interest to have his or her identity publicly known and protecting that privacy is more important than naming the parent who got in a scuffle at the promotion ceremony.

How are you certain the fight is related to the Outdoor Lab incident?

In any case, the parents involved in the fight should be banned from APS properties moving forward.

Oh, I’m not! It’s something that was suggested upthread. I imagine it was something pretty significant that provoked the fight if it resulted in a physical altercation in this setting.

Sounds like Jerry Springer to me. Maybe a shared baby daddy.

It was related to the outdoor lab assault

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wouldn’t public shaming of the adult also subject their kid(s) to ridicule?

Parents who use their kids as shields to not be publicly named, SHOULD be shamed.

I think the problem here, if we’re to agree with some of the inferences made, is that identifying the parents is tantamount to identifying the children involved in a case of inappropriate touching, and presumably one of those children is a victim. It’s not even remotely in that child’s interest to have his or her identity publicly known and protecting that privacy is more important than naming the parent who got in a scuffle at the promotion ceremony.

How are you certain the fight is related to the Outdoor Lab incident?

In any case, the parents involved in the fight should be banned from APS properties moving forward.

Oh, I’m not! It’s something that was suggested upthread. I imagine it was something pretty significant that provoked the fight if it resulted in a physical altercation in this setting.

Sounds like Jerry Springer to me. Maybe a shared baby daddy.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wouldn’t public shaming of the adult also subject their kid(s) to ridicule?

Parents who use their kids as shields to not be publicly named, SHOULD be shamed.

I think the problem here, if we’re to agree with some of the inferences made, is that identifying the parents is tantamount to identifying the children involved in a case of inappropriate touching, and presumably one of those children is a victim. It’s not even remotely in that child’s interest to have his or her identity publicly known and protecting that privacy is more important than naming the parent who got in a scuffle at the promotion ceremony.

How are you certain the fight is related to the Outdoor Lab incident?

In any case, the parents involved in the fight should be banned from APS properties moving forward.

Oh, I’m not! It’s something that was suggested upthread. I imagine it was something pretty significant that provoked the fight if it resulted in a physical altercation in this setting.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wouldn’t public shaming of the adult also subject their kid(s) to ridicule?

Parents who use their kids as shields to not be publicly named, SHOULD be shamed.

I think the problem here, if we’re to agree with some of the inferences made, is that identifying the parents is tantamount to identifying the children involved in a case of inappropriate touching, and presumably one of those children is a victim. It’s not even remotely in that child’s interest to have his or her identity publicly known and protecting that privacy is more important than naming the parent who got in a scuffle at the promotion ceremony.

How are you certain the fight is related to the Outdoor Lab incident?

In any case, the parents involved in the fight should be banned from APS properties moving forward.