Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

jakeburdett OP t1_je39yag wrote

I appreciate the feedback. I feel strongly about the issue, hence the strong and unsubtle language. Maybe if you knew everything I knew about the situation, you’d feel just as strongly. Regardless, I encourage you to tune in to the follow up pieces to see if you think my level of outrage is justified.

None of the things I’ve posted come from any sort of confidential information, and is instead all available upon request through the MD HOA Act.

You say no one cares about Lakey or the CA Board. Perhaps you don’t, but many do care about this conflict a lot. And it’s hard to determine who’s doing a good job if the public has only been exposed to a one-sided, false and manipulated narrative

I did have a few folks read after I wrote, and suggest edits, many of which were incorporated. But let’s face it: it’s a 22 page piece, so even an editor can only do so much to change the original tone. I do appreciate the feedback, though

−3

blorbschploble t1_je3afh4 wrote

No what I mean is no one cares about them personally

Public servants are necessarily expendable. Sounds like all these people kinda suck in their public capacities. Because waves hands around

6

jakeburdett OP t1_je3az4j wrote

Sadly, a cult of personality was invented around Lakey, so some DO care about her personally!

But even for those who just cared about her professional performance, how could folks properly evaluate that without these facts? Without these facts, people had a much more positive idea of Lakey’s performance than was due, and so many viewed the CA Board pushing her out as irresponsible, rather than responsible. Many people may vote in April based on that faulty logic. That, to me, is why this story was still important to get out there

0