Seriouslee: "incompetence and cronyism." Pretty much what "leadership" means in the Valley.
May 4, 2014 at 1:59 p.m.
It's interesting to see people predict with great certainty how he'll do based on vague platitudes about his leadership abilities. Look at his record. Not from here twenty-odd years ago, but where he's been the past ten years. I'm not impressed. And I wouldn't predict he'll be great or even good. Just a hometown favorite. Which is an illogical reason to support a candidate.
May 2, 2014 at 5:18 p.m.
For what it's worth, I applaud the Vindy for taking the time and care to put together a good article on the question of the relationship between the fracking industry's practices and the surge in earthquakes around here in the last few years. I was impressed by the reporting as well as the graphics in the print story. A lot of the mud-slinging (brine slinging?) in this discussion is of no value whatsoever, and seems to be little more than a big pissing contest for people with ego problems (as far as I can tell...). So it's heartening that at least we have a decent story here. It doesn't strike me as biased, which is mighty hard to do for a story like this, unless you simply report the talking points of industry spokespeople (which I've accused the Vindy of doing in the past). Nice work, folks.
March 23, 2014 at 7:13 p.m.
*Dammit, I meant "quantity nor QUALITY"... my bad.
March 10, 2014 at 8:34 p.m.
The problem is neither the quantity nor quantity of comments, nor the anonymity of the commenters. You go to any news outlet on the Internet that allows comments, and you'll see the same the same thing as what you see up above. If you want unmoderated comments, that's what you get. Otherwise, you're lamenting human nature.
The problem is your paper needs to work harder to model good behavior. You want people to cut down on the thoughtless, poorly researched potshots? Then let's see less of it from your paper's opinion pieces. You want people to value inquiry-- serious, nonpartisan investigation? Let's see your paper demonstrate it through truly impressive investigative journalism.
If you look at my other comments, you'll see one in which I had an exchange with Dennis, for example. I was delighted that he responded to my somewhat inflammatory statements, and I felt he made a fair point.
But I was also disappointed that there was no real response to my main query: Why didn't the Vindy actually investigate YSU's financial condition during the 2011 contract negotiations? Why instead did it choose to use the BOT's figures as if they were primary evidence? Why didn't the Vindy look into YSU's financial situation itself? I can think of only two possible answers: laziness or anti-faculty bias. Sorry, I don't mean to be impolite, but that's how I see it, unless you make a decent case that it was something else.
I'm not saying you'll eliminate trolling if you push for a higher standard. And I know that newspapers are in a tough spot. And that editors get beat up on. Believe me, I want the Vindy to succeed. I just don't see you guys setting the best example.
March 10, 2014 at 8:30 p.m.
Folks, you're all missing a crucial factor here: the godawful monstrosity called the Pollock House! I get depressed just looking at that dull, dour "residence." What's that color? "River Bottom Mud"? "Vintage Sludge"? "Last Week's Green Beans"? For all the renovation, it has absolutely no character, from the nondescript parking area up to the bland, monotonous eaves. Maybe it's supposed to be like that; I'm no historian of architecture. I mean, I'd love to make 375K, but I'm not sure even that would be enough to make me want to call that awful place "home."
February 18, 2014 at 9:19 p.m.
If he's leaving because he doesn't like this place, it's because of the kinds of "BS" spouted by you two. He's probably made this decision in large part because he started out at SIU and feels a connection to the place. In other words, he wants to go home. Is it frustrating that he came to YSU most likely knowing he'd like to be elsewhere? Sure. Is he some kind of fraudster or pawn in somebody else's fraud? I don't think so. Come off it, people.
February 16, 2014 at 10:53 p.m.
Thanks! You, too!
December 30, 2013 at 1:55 p.m.
Nope, nope, nope. I believe you're wrong on this, brother. First, people get all bent out of shape about a fictional "war on Christmas" that such secular greetings as "Happy Holidays" seem to represent. There is no war on Christmas, and I'm not going to feed that myth by saying, "Oh, I guess you all are right, it's silly of me to object to 'Merry Christmas.'" Nope, not gonna play that game.
Second, and this is a point I believe many people don't understand, is the very phrasing of the greeting. When you say "Merry Christmas," you are telling ME to have a merry Christmas. It's an imperative phrasing. I've seen "guides" that include, for example, the instruction for Jewish cashiers to say "Happy Hanukkah" and African Americans to say "Happy Kwanzaa," if they want to.
But what point, exactly, is there to a Jewish cashier wishing a Christian customer a "Happy Hannukah"? And since a cashier typically DOESN'T KNOW a person's holiday affiliations, it's always risking a bit of alienation or awkwardness to do that.
I know I'm in the minority, but this country was founded in part on the belief that we ought to at least give minority viewpoints a hearing. People will always say, "What's the BIG DEAL?" That's not a good argument for anything.
Here's my suggestion: "Have a nice day." And, if you feel compelled to wish the person a happy whatever, at least find out first what they celebrate. That's no big deal, right?
December 29, 2013 at 1:47 p.m.
"Beginning in fall 2014, Youngstown State University will no longer accept any student who applies."
So, the university is shutting down?
October 30, 2013 at 11:41 a.m.