On Fri, 25 Sep 2009 07:13:47 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
grammatim at (no spam) verizon.net> wrote:

On Sep 25, 8:50 am, Phil <doggl... at (no spam) yahoooo.com> wrote:
On Fri, 25 Sep 2009 04:46:51 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
gramma... at (no spam) verizon.net> wrote:
On Sep 25, 7:24 am, Phil <doggl... at (no spam) yahoooo.com> wrote:
On Thu, 24 Sep 2009 19:12:25 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
gramma... at (no spam) verizon.net> wrote:
On Sep 24, 7:02 pm, Phil <doggl... at (no spam) yahoooo.com> wrote:
On Thu, 24 Sep 2009 14:19:43 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
gramma... at (no spam) verizon.net> wrote:

And Bloomberg doesn't decide ticketing policy for the precincts.

You don't think he has pull when it comes the police issuing tickets?

I don't think he micro-manages.

Telling the commissioner of police to enforce isn't
micro-managing.

A physical impossibility.

Bloomberg tells Kelly that he wants the police to write more tickets.
He does so.  The police do so.   What's impossible here?

that's not what Fighter Against Freedom was complaining about.

You're the one that said that Bloomberg doesn't decide tiketing
policy. I replied to this in disagreement.

You're the one that said that Bloomberg doesn't decide tiketing
policy.  I replied to this in disagreement.

Then maybe you'd better say what you mean by "decide ti[c]keting
policy." What _I_ meant was all the absurd details Fighter Against
Freedom is going on about and blaming on Bloomberg.

I wonder whether Fighter Against Freedom is going to come up with
lengthy messages explaining why Thompson is the better candidate for
mayor. (But I won't see them because they won't be cross-posted to
nyc.transit, right?)

On Fri, 25 Sep 2009 10:51:59 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
grammatim at (no spam) verizon.net> wrote:
I wonder whether Fighter Against Freedom is going to come up with
lengthy messages explaining why Thompson is the better candidate for
mayor. (But I won't see them because they won't be cross-posted to
nyc.transit, right?)

I guess killfiling him would be out of the question?

On Fri, 25 Sep 2009 10:51:59 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"

gramma... at (no spam) verizon.net> wrote:

You're the one that said that Bloomberg doesn't decide tiketing
policy.  I replied to this in disagreement.

Then maybe you'd better say what you mean by "decide ti[c]keting
policy." What _I_ meant was all the absurd details Fighter Against
Freedom is going on about and blaming on Bloomberg.

If Bloomberg wants the cops to concentrate on issuing certain summons,
they do it.

I wonder whether Fighter Against Freedom is going to come up with
lengthy messages explaining why Thompson is the better candidate for
mayor. (But I won't see them because they won't be cross-posted to
nyc.transit, right?)

I guess killfiling him would be out of the question?

If Bloomberg wants the cops to concentrate on issuing certain summons,
they do it.

I find it highly unlikely that "Bloomberg wants the cops to
concentrate on issuing certain summons."

I wonder whether Fighter Against Freedom is going to come up with
lengthy messages explaining why Thompson is the better candidate for
mayor. (But I won't see them because they won't be cross-posted to
nyc.transit, right?)

I guess killfiling him would be out of the question?

Yup.

On Fri, 25 Sep 2009 04:46:51 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
grammatim at (no spam) verizon.net> wrote:

On Sep 25, 7:24 am, Phil <doggl... at (no spam) yahoooo.com> wrote:
On Thu, 24 Sep 2009 19:12:25 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"

gramma... at (no spam) verizon.net> wrote:
On Sep 24, 7:02 pm, Phil <doggl... at (no spam) yahoooo.com> wrote:
On Thu, 24 Sep 2009 14:19:43 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"

gramma... at (no spam) verizon.net> wrote:

And Bloomberg doesn't decide ticketing policy for the precincts.

You don't think he has pull when it comes the police issuing tickets?

I don't think he micro-manages.

Telling the commissioner of police to enforce all city codes isn't
micro-managing.

A physical impossibility.

Bloomberg tells Kelly that he wants the police to write more tickets.
He does so. The police do so. What's impossible here

Phil wrote:
On Fri, 25 Sep 2009 10:51:59 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
grammatim at (no spam) verizon.net> wrote:
I wonder whether Fighter Against Freedom is going to come up with
lengthy messages explaining why Thompson is the better candidate for
mayor. (But I won't see them because they won't be cross-posted to
nyc.transit, right?)

I guess killfiling him would be out of the question?

Google Groups doesn't allow it, AFAIK.

On 2009-09-26 02:05:07 -0400, Bolwerk <bolwerk at (no spam) gmail.com> said:

Phil wrote:
On Fri, 25 Sep 2009 10:51:59 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
grammatim at (no spam) verizon.net> wrote:
I wonder whether Fighter Against Freedom is going to come up with
lengthy messages explaining why Thompson is the better candidate for
mayor. (But I won't see them because they won't be cross-posted to
nyc.transit, right?)

I guess killfiling him would be out of the question?

Google Groups doesn't allow it, AFAIK.

You could ignore his posts.

On Sat, 26 Sep 2009 20:15:00 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"





gramma... at (no spam) verizon.net> wrote:
You don't remember the ticket blitzes, not too long ago?  A pregnant
woman received a sumons for sitting on the steps leading to a subway
station?  Anothe rperson received a ticket for sitting on a milk
crate?

You have evidence that Bloomberg ordered the ticketing of people
sitting on steps or milk crates? What is your evidence?

http://www.nydailynews.com/archives/news/2003/05/21/2003-05-21_ticket....

That one says that more than six years ago, Bloomberg told the police
to not allow unlawful loitering.

http://www.nydailynews.com/archives/news/2003/06/02/2003-06-02_stop_b....

And that one says that Gottbaum -- who did a lousy job as Public
Advocate -- wanted Bloomberg to "forgive" "nuisance" tickets like
those given in an attempt to prevent loitering. Actually you sound
like Reagan (or Limbaugh): you have exactly two anecdotes, from many
years ago, that bear almost no relation to reality.

You asked me to cite sources that 'a pregnant  received a sumons for
sitting on the steps leading to a subway  station andwhere 'another
person received a ticket for sitting on a milk crate.'

And I did.

And now you're complaining about it.  Why is that?

You don't remember the ticket blitzes, not too long ago?  A pregnant
woman received a sumons for sitting on the steps leading to a subway
station?  Anothe rperson received a ticket for sitting on a milk
crate?

You have evidence that Bloomberg ordered the ticketing of people
sitting on steps or milk crates? What is your evidence?

http://www.nydailynews.com/archives/news/2003/05/21/2003-05-21_ticket...

That one says that more than six years ago, Bloomberg told the police
to not allow unlawful loitering.

http://www.nydailynews.com/archives/news/2003/06/02/2003-06-02_stop_b...

And that one says that Gottbaum -- who did a lousy job as Public
Advocate -- wanted Bloomberg to "forgive" "nuisance" tickets like
those given in an attempt to prevent loitering. Actually you sound
like Reagan (or Limbaugh): you have exactly two anecdotes, from many
years ago, that bear almost no relation to reality.

Sometimes, newsgroup discussion threads just stray from the original
topic.

Both the original topic and this one are irrelevant here.

On Sun, 27 Sep 2009 05:56:05 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"





gramma... at (no spam) verizon.net> wrote:
You asked me to cite sources that 'a pregnant  received a sumons for
sitting on the steps leading to a subway  station andwhere 'another
person received a ticket for sitting on a milk crate.'

No, I did not. I asked for evidence _that Bloomberg ordered tickets to
be issued for sitting on steps or crates_.

And I did.

No, what you found was evidence that Bloomberg asked the police to
discourage loitering on the streets, and the way _they chose to
implement his request_ was by ticketing people they perceived as
loitering.

And now you're complaining about it.  Why is that?

Because you didn't show that Bloomberg ordered the ticketing of people
sitting on steps or crates.

I was going to attach audio files that I personally recorded of
Bloomberg ordering the police to 'ticket everybody sitting on milk
crates and public stairs,' but someone stole it late one night.

Bloomberg ordered the police to issue more tickets to raise revenue
for NYC.

You asked me to cite sources that 'a pregnant  received a sumons for
sitting on the steps leading to a subway  station andwhere 'another
person received a ticket for sitting on a milk crate.'

No, I did not. I asked for evidence _that Bloomberg ordered tickets to
be issued for sitting on steps or crates_.

And I did.

No, what you found was evidence that Bloomberg asked the police to
discourage loitering on the streets, and the way _they chose to
implement his request_ was by ticketing people they perceived as
loitering.

And now you're complaining about it.  Why is that?

Because you didn't show that Bloomberg ordered the ticketing of people
sitting on steps or crates.

And now you're complaining about it.  Why is that?

Because you didn't show that Bloomberg ordered the ticketing of people
sitting on steps or crates.

I was going to attach audio files that I personally recorded of
Bloomberg ordering the police to 'ticket everybody sitting on milk
crates and public stairs,' but someone stole it late one night.

Bloomberg ordered the police to issue more tickets to raise revenue
for NYC.

What's your evidence that he did so?

On Sat, 26 Sep 2009 20:15:00 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
grammatim at (no spam) verizon.net> wrote:

You don't remember the ticket blitzes, not too long ago?  A pregnant
woman received a sumons for sitting on the steps leading to a subway
station?  Anothe rperson received a ticket for sitting on a milk
crate?

You have evidence that Bloomberg ordered the ticketing of people
sitting on steps or milk crates? What is your evidence?

http://www.nydailynews.com/archives/news/2003/05/21/2003-05-21_ticket...

That one says that more than six years ago, Bloomberg told the police
to not allow unlawful loitering.

http://www.nydailynews.com/archives/news/2003/06/02/2003-06-02_stop_b...

And that one says that Gottbaum -- who did a lousy job as Public
Advocate -- wanted Bloomberg to "forgive" "nuisance" tickets like
those given in an attempt to prevent loitering. Actually you sound
like Reagan (or Limbaugh): you have exactly two anecdotes, from many
years ago, that bear almost no relation to reality.

You asked me to cite sources that 'a pregnant received a sumons for
sitting on the steps leading to a subway station andwhere 'another
person received a ticket for sitting on a milk crate.'

And I did.

And now you're complaining about it. Why is that?

And, then, there's this:
http://www.nydailynews.com/archives/news/2003/05/29/2003-05-29_quotas__what_quotas_mayor_se.html

Bloomberg calls his ticket quotas 'performance measurements.'