Page 1 of 8 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 160

Thread: If Roland Maw is not confirmed, who should the Governor pick to replace Johnstone

  1. #1
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    Alaska
    Posts
    384

    Default If Roland Maw is not confirmed, who should the Governor pick to replace Johnstone

    Several posts have argued for and against getting someone ready to submit to the governor should Roland Maw not get confirmed to the BOF. I think that it would be unwise to wait to start figuring out who should be encouraged to put in their name in the event that Maw does not make it. Forget anyone in either the drift or set net fisheries in UCI. But, surely there is someone from Anchorage or the Valley who could provide some perspective and would see all sides and not just the KRSA side.

  2. #2
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    5,519

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Questairtoo View Post
    Several posts have argued for and against getting someone ready to submit to the governor should Roland Maw not get confirmed to the BOF. I think that it would be unwise to wait to start figuring out who should be encouraged to put in their name in the event that Maw does not make it. Forget anyone in either the drift or set net fisheries in UCI. But, surely there is someone from Anchorage or the Valley who could provide some perspective and would see all sides and not just the KRSA side.
    I hope no one responds to this post except me. To throw out people's names on a public forum without them knowing it and having them up for public discussion is not acceptable by any ethical standard. In fact I am going to request that this post be eliminated from the forum. Names could come up and the person has no interest in applying. Also, Questairtoo is not on Boards and Commissions and there is a process to follow for nominations. If people want to do things in private that is fine but on a public forum no one should be offering up anyone without their permission.

  3. #3
    Supporting Member iofthetaiga's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Tanana Valley AK
    Posts
    7,217

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Questairtoo View Post
    But, surely there is someone from Anchorage or the Valley who could provide some perspective and would see all sides and not just the KRSA side.
    Speaking of perspective, why wouldn't we seek someone who truly understands and cares for the Alaskan environment (and I use that term in a broad sense), rather than just another import living in the Anchorage/valley bubble and calling him/herself an Alaskan?
    ...he who knows nothing is nearer to truth than he whose mind is filled with falsehoods & errors. ~Thomas Jefferson
    I would rather have a mind opened by wonder than one closed by belief. ~Gerry Spence
    The last thing Alaska needs is another bigot. ~member Catch It
    #Resist

  4. #4

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Questairtoo View Post
    Several posts have argued for and against getting someone ready to submit to the governor should Roland Maw not get confirmed to the BOF. I think that it would be unwise to wait to start figuring out who should be encouraged to put in their name in the event that Maw does not make it. Forget anyone in either the drift or set net fisheries in UCI. But, surely there is someone from Anchorage or the Valley who could provide some perspective and would see all sides and not just the KRSA side.
    Why don't you tell us who you would like to see on the BOF? Nothing wrong with that. Surely you have a candidate in mind, can get their permission, and present their name to discuss. We can all dig up every dirty rumor we have ever heard about them, and then send our nonprofit charity organizations to Juneau to lobby for/against them. Sounds like great public process. This thread sucks.

  5. #5
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    Alaska
    Posts
    384

    Default

    The responses to a legitimate question once again are indicative of why so few people participate on this forum. In good faith i simply asked who should be considered if Dr Maw was not confirmed, which is going to happen. And predictably I am slammed. Rather than have a dialog on an important subject, Nerka, who seems to think he is the moderator and the brightest person on the forum wants to stifle conversation claiming ethics. Come on Nerka. there is nothing unethical about asking who might be a good
    BOF member. People on this forum regularly state which BOF members are part of the syndicate ( al la smithtb) and nobody says that is un ethetical. Who made you the censor of a discussion that needs to be had?
    And smithtb once again shows what he thinks of people who have a differing opinion. No wonder we have so little success! Hopefully you do not speak for all of us.

  6. #6
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    1,959

    Default

    You do come off as a wolf in sheep's clothing, or is it just a sheep?

  7. #7
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    5,519

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Questairtoo View Post
    The responses to a legitimate question once again are indicative of why so few people participate on this forum. In good faith i simply asked who should be considered if Dr Maw was not confirmed, which is going to happen. And predictably I am slammed. Rather than have a dialog on an important subject, Nerka, who seems to think he is the moderator and the brightest person on the forum wants to stifle conversation claiming ethics. Come on Nerka. there is nothing unethical about asking who might be a good
    BOF member. People on this forum regularly state which BOF members are part of the syndicate ( al la smithtb) and nobody says that is un ethetical. Who made you the censor of a discussion that needs to be had?

    And smithtb once again shows what he thinks of people who have a differing opinion. No wonder we have so little success! Hopefully you do not speak for all of us.
    Nobody made me moderator. I said I was going to report your post and I did. However, you seem to lack any sense of ethics in these matter. So let me explain to you again why you are wrong in your post. First, Board of Fish members are public figures and open to full public discussion. You want to have a private person who may not even want the appointment name put out on the forum for public debate. If you cannot see what is wrong with that your mother did not raise you very well. Privacy is key to a person and as I said if that person posts he/she is interested then fine - have the discussion.

    This forum does not have names and yet you want to put someone who may not even participate on the forum have their name run through the mud slinging that comes with being nominated or considered for a public figure. It is also a way to troll for what others are thinking. That is just not right by any standard.

    So you can do whatever you want but since this is an opinion piece I made the opinion that people should ignore your request. I hope that you rethink you position here. You have lots of panic in your voice or you are a good actor.

  8. #8
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    Alaska
    Posts
    384

    Default

    [QUOTE=Nerka;1458574]Nobody made me moderator. I said I was going to report your post and I did. However, you seem to lack any sense of ethics in these matter. So let me explain to you again why you are wrong in your post. First, Board of Fish members are public figures and open to full public discussion. You want to have a private person who may not even want the appointment name put out on the forum for public debate. If you cannot see what is wrong with that your mother did not raise you very well. Privacy is key to a person and as I said if that person posts he/she is interested then fine - have the discussion.

    One of the purposes of a forum like this one is supposed to be, to encourage discussion with an eye to perhaps getting one to change their mind about things they thought or believed. But there is no chance for that to happen here. Most of the very few people who post here are fixed in their beliefs and for the most part just want to show how smart they are and ridicule those who disagree with them. If someone does, then they are a 'wolf in sheeps clothing". Or they have 'panic' in their post. Or for example like Nerka saying that one's mother did not do a good job in raising someone who has a different opinion. Thankfully most of us do not feel the same way and are far more objective when it comes to figuring out what is right and wrong with our approach to protect our turf. It is no wonder that we are the subject of ridicule in the legislature and with so many thousands who seem willing to sign the initiative. As i said earlier, I have been considering getting out because the future looks bleak. Thanks for helping me make up my mind.

  9. #9
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    soldotna
    Posts
    841

    Default

    Voices like yours are needed on this forum, Questairtoo. I've pretty much "thrown in the towel" with participating here as it gets old having anything I post twisted. Plus, what chance is there of honest discussion with some on this forum that just flat come out & say that they are a "jerk" and an a-hole?

  10. #10
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    1,959

    Default

    Only if you were as honest as this jerk or A-Hole. I stick by the feeling I am getting from questairtoo claiming one thing and talking another.

  11. #11
    Member hoose35's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Soldotna, Alaska, United States
    Posts
    2,891

    Default

    I nominate ice blue. He would be a fair, balanced board member, always looking out for the resources first and foremost. He would be fair to everyone, and make sure every user group gets treated with respect. He would for sure oppose the setnet ban, because he knows that it is being pushed for the sole purpose of allocation. There you have it, if not maw, it's ice blue for sure
    Responsible Conservation > Political Allocation

  12. #12
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    Alaska
    Posts
    384

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by iceblue View Post
    Voices like yours are needed on this forum, Questairtoo. I've pretty much "thrown in the towel" with participating here as it gets old having anything I post twisted. Plus, what chance is there of honest discussion with some on this forum that just flat come out & say that they are a "jerk" and an a-hole?
    Me too Iceblue. Could not have said it better. They really do not want honest discussion. i will think hard whether to participate.

  13. #13
    Member hoose35's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Soldotna, Alaska, United States
    Posts
    2,891

    Default

    No life is joining the forum for the sole purpose of stirring the pot. You claim no one comes on the forum. You need to get out more. There is much more to the forum than fisheries management. Many in here contribute much more than just the **** stirring that I have seen from new members in the fisheries management lately. I'm not for maw or against him. I just want an ethical board that is not susceptible to corruption and manages the resources for the good of all the people of this state. It will never happen unless we get rid of the lobbyists, special interest groups, associations, and greedy s.o.b's that fight for allocation
    Responsible Conservation > Political Allocation

  14. #14
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    Alaska
    Posts
    384

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by hoose35 View Post
    No life is joining the forum for the sole purpose of stirring the pot. You claim no one comes on the forum. You need to get out more. There is much more to the forum than fisheries management. Many in here contribute much more than just the **** stirring that I have seen from new members in the fisheries management lately. I'm not for maw or against him. I just want an ethical board that is not susceptible to corruption and manages the resources for the good of all the people of this state. It will never happen unless we get rid of the lobbyists, special interest groups, associations, and greedy s.o.b's that fight for allocation
    Really hoose35? Every person who fights for allocation is a greedy *********? That sound like a lot of people. And they are all an ********* Just who might those people be? Which associations, special interest groups? Let's see. there is UCIDA, KPFA, KRSA and several more on the peninsula. All those included?

  15. #15
    Member hoose35's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Soldotna, Alaska, United States
    Posts
    2,891

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Questairtoo View Post
    Really hoose35? Every person who fights for allocation is a greedy *********? That sound like a lot of people. And they are all an ********* Just who might those people be? Which associations, special interest groups? Let's see. there is UCIDA, KPFA, KRSA and several more on the peninsula. All those included?
    Yep, all those groups are included......
    Responsible Conservation > Political Allocation

  16. #16
    Member hoose35's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Soldotna, Alaska, United States
    Posts
    2,891

    Default

    I will rephrase, all those who fight to take allocation away from others for their own personal gain. Yes, to me that's greedy, it's my opinion, and I'm sticking to it
    Responsible Conservation > Political Allocation

  17. #17

    Default

    Questairtoo, you haven't put much effort into making your thread productive. If you think the title is an appropriate discussion, then why not encourage it by recommending someone?

  18. #18

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Questairtoo View Post
    Really hoose35? Every person who fights for allocation is a greedy *********? That sound like a lot of people. And they are all an ********* Just who might those people be? Which associations, special interest groups? Let's see. there is UCIDA, KPFA, KRSA and several more on the peninsula. All those included?
    How about the ones who are actively trying to eliminate other users based on falsehoods and greed. Sometimes it's easier not to rock the boat if you're trying to get ahead in life. Doesn't make speaking up wrong.

  19. #19
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    Alaska
    Posts
    384

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by smithtb View Post
    Questairtoo, you haven't put much effort into making your thread productive. If you think the title is an appropriate discussion, then why not encourage it by recommending someone?
    Ok, how about Gary Hollier, Jim Butler, Brent Johnson., Mike Crawford , From PWS. Heath Hilliard, Jerry McCune. From Seward, Diane Dubuc. From Anchorage, jacques Smith, Mark Hoffman.
    Any of these people would do a good job in assuring conservation while at the same time be fair in allocation decisions. Of course they would be conflicted out in some cases under existing law. But that may change as well with new bills addressing the conflicts being considered by the legislature.
    So Nerka, by listing names of people that I think would make good BOF members have I engaged in unethical conduct? My comments are all positive and are there any of my suggestions you can agree with. Nobody need make disparaging remarks. But if you think any of these people could do a good job why not weigh in. Might come in handy to have at least thought about some one, just in case.
    X

  20. #20
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    Alaska
    Posts
    384

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by smithtb View Post
    Questairtoo, you haven't put much effort into making your thread productive. If you think the title is an appropriate discussion, then why not encourage it by recommending someone?
    Ok, how about Gary Hollier, Jim Butler, Brent Johnson., Mike Crawford , From PWS. Heath Hilliard, Jerry McCune. From Seward, Diane Dubuc. From Anchorage, jacques Smith, Mark Hoffman.
    Any of these people would do a good job in assuring conservation while at the same time be fair in allocation decisions. Of course they would be conflicted out in some cases under existing law. But that may change as well with new bills addressing the conflicts being considered by the legislature.
    So Nerka, by listing names of people that I think would make good BOF members have I engaged in unethical conduct? My comments are all positive and are there any of my suggestions you can agree with. Nobody need make disparaging remarks. But if you think any of these people could do a good job why not weigh in. Might come in handy to have at least thought about some one, just in case.
    X

Page 1 of 8 123 ... LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •