|
MohonkNeighborsassoc.
Aug 19, 2010, 1:10 PM
Post #176 of 194
(5603 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 3, 2010
Posts: 38
|
Actually it is an eyesore to me. I think it's interesting that the Mohonk Preserve continues to strong arm their neighbors when they want to put 2 houses on a 60 acre parcel (Haviland document) yet could care less when their sister corporation builds a new spa on the ridge, or the light pollution from the Mountain house parking lots, or Mohonk Preserve's own Visitor centers and rental properties.
|
|
|
|
|
carabiner96
Aug 19, 2010, 1:23 PM
Post #177 of 194
(5593 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 10, 2006
Posts: 12610
|
MohonkNeighborsassoc. wrote: Actually it is an eyesore to me. I think it's interesting that the Mohonk Preserve continues to strong arm their neighbors when they want to put 2 houses on a 60 acre parcel (Haviland document) yet could care less when their sister corporation builds a new spa on the ridge, or the light pollution from the Mountain house parking lots, or Mohonk Preserve's own Visitor centers and rental properties.
It's not an eyesore, it's just a building. A 50 foot tall glowing crucifix? THAT's an eyesore. It seems like the MPNA wants to have everything both ways in their favor.
|
|
|
|
|
marc801
Aug 19, 2010, 2:15 PM
Post #178 of 194
(5577 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 1, 2005
Posts: 2806
|
MohonkNeighborsassoc. wrote: I think it's interesting that the Mohonk Preserve continues to strong arm their neighbors when they want to put 2 houses on a 60 acre parcel (Haviland document)...
MohonkNeighborsassoc. wrote: ...yet could care less when their sister corporation builds a new spa on the ridge,...
As others have pointed out, repeatedly, here and on other fora, to both you and Kent (CapedCrusader) - the spa is a strawman argument and you keep trying to cause confusion by intentionally conflating the Preserve and the Mountain House. But when you have precious little substantive arguments, I suppose it's understandable to keep trotting out the same old shit.
|
|
|
|
|
MohonkNeighborsassoc.
Aug 31, 2010, 5:14 AM
Post #179 of 194
(5409 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 3, 2010
Posts: 38
|
This morning on the Gary Bischoff show a Mohonk Preserve neighbor and two title experts (New York State Supreme Court) talked about the various lawsuits initiated by the Mohonk Preserve.
The key topics covered in the one hour show included:
1. Why the Mohonk Mountain house created the Mohonk Trust.
2. Taxes, preservation, and land acquisition tactics.
3. The relationship between the Shawangunk Conservancy, Friends of the Shawangunks and the Mohonk Preserve.
4. The Mohonk Preserve creating phantom chains of title from parcels that they have no title to.
5. Where does the money come from to initiate these lawsuits.
MPNA
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
curt
Sep 20, 2010, 4:20 AM
Post #181 of 194
(5300 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 27, 2002
Posts: 18275
|
This is getting ridiculous on Gunks.com. I have now been banned from the site for merely disagreeing with AG, aka MPNA, aka Chris Ullrich.
http://gunks.com/...s.php/topics/55055/1
The last few pages are particularly interesting--that is, if you're interested in this at all.
Curt
|
|
|
|
|
boymeetsrock
Sep 20, 2010, 12:56 PM
Post #182 of 194
(5280 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 11, 2005
Posts: 1709
|
Holly shit show. I've stopped into that thread a few times, since things died down on here...
I'm wondering why any of you all take the time to respond to this "advocacy group". Not sure where they have earned any sort of response or respect for their argument. Looks like a group of trolls working in concert to me. It's not like this is a new issue, or likely that they are gaining any traction here.
Not that I hold it against anyone for giving MPNA a full ration of shit. Just seems like it is time to leave them alone and let their thread die out.
|
|
|
|
|
jakedatc
Sep 20, 2010, 4:09 PM
Post #183 of 194
(5259 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 12, 2003
Posts: 11054
|
curt wrote: This is getting ridiculous on Gunks.com. I have now been banned from the site for merely disagreeing with AG, aka MPNA, aka Chris Ullrich. http://gunks.com/...s.php/topics/55055/1 The last few pages are particularly interesting--that is, if you're interested in this at all. Curt
Yea... i got banned too briefly.. though i'm sure your disagreements were better worded than mine. But i am wondering what stake Gunks.com's Webmaster has in all of this.. because he is certainly VERY pro- AG
|
|
|
|
|
curt
Sep 21, 2010, 8:26 PM
Post #184 of 194
(5221 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 27, 2002
Posts: 18275
|
jakedatc wrote: curt wrote: This is getting ridiculous on Gunks.com. I have now been banned from the site for merely disagreeing with AG, aka MPNA, aka Chris Ullrich. http://gunks.com/...s.php/topics/55055/1 The last few pages are particularly interesting--that is, if you're interested in this at all. Curt Yea... i got banned too briefly.. though i'm sure your disagreements were better worded than mine. But i am wondering what stake Gunks.com's Webmaster has in all of this.. because he is certainly VERY pro- AG
The webmaster of "Gunks.com" is clearly nothing more than a simple tool of MPNA. Not only has my account been locked, several of my posts there have been deleted by site management. Not for posting anything there that would be considered at all inappropriate anywhere else, either.
To be very clear MPNA is a disingenuous fraud. He is asking climbers to take action against the Mohonk Preserve if court cases are adjudicated against the MP, but my posts asking him about the injunction recently granted against him (and in favor of the Mohonk Preserve) were simply ignored by him--and then deleted by Gunks.com management.
It has become overwhelmingly clear that the last thing Chris Ullrich wants (or any of the others who also post as AG/MPNA) is an open debate on the merits of MP/neighbor issues. Instead, to forward his own personal agenda, he desires only a platform for posting highly biased and inflammatory propaganda aimed at smearing the reputation of the Mohonk Preserve, The Mohonk Mountain House and other local land preservation groups. And, at Gunks.com, that is exactly the situation that he has.
Curt
|
|
|
|
|
jakedatc
Sep 21, 2010, 8:29 PM
Post #185 of 194
(5216 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 12, 2003
Posts: 11054
|
curt wrote: jakedatc wrote: curt wrote: This is getting ridiculous on Gunks.com. I have now been banned from the site for merely disagreeing with AG, aka MPNA, aka Chris Ullrich. http://gunks.com/...s.php/topics/55055/1 The last few pages are particularly interesting--that is, if you're interested in this at all. Curt Yea... i got banned too briefly.. though i'm sure your disagreements were better worded than mine. But i am wondering what stake Gunks.com's Webmaster has in all of this.. because he is certainly VERY pro- AG The webmaster of "Gunks.com" is clearly nothing more than a simple tool of MPNA. Not only has my account been locked, several of my posts there have been deleted by site management. Not for posting anything there that would be considered at all inappropriate anywhere else, either. To be very clear MPNA is a disingenuous fraud. He is asking climbers to take action against the Mohonk Preserve if court cases are adjudicated against the MP, but my posts asking him about the injunction recently granted against him (and in favor of the Mohonk Preserve) were simply ignored by him--and then deleted by Gunks.com management. It has become overwhelmingly clear that the last thing Chris Ullrich wants (or any of the others who also post as AG/MPNA) is an open debate on the merits of MP/neighbor issues. Instead, to forward his own personal agenda, he desires only a platform for posting highly biased and inflammatory propaganda aimed at smearing the reputation of the Mohonk Preserve, The Mohonk Mountain House and other local land preservation groups. And, at Gunks.com, that is exactly the situation that he has. Curt
Yep, Should probably have this and his other threads locked on here and any further threads removed.
|
|
|
|
|
carabiner96
Sep 21, 2010, 8:43 PM
Post #186 of 194
(5210 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 10, 2006
Posts: 12610
|
curt wrote: jakedatc wrote: curt wrote: This is getting ridiculous on Gunks.com. I have now been banned from the site for merely disagreeing with AG, aka MPNA, aka Chris Ullrich. http://gunks.com/...s.php/topics/55055/1 The last few pages are particularly interesting--that is, if you're interested in this at all. Curt Yea... i got banned too briefly.. though i'm sure your disagreements were better worded than mine. But i am wondering what stake Gunks.com's Webmaster has in all of this.. because he is certainly VERY pro- AG The webmaster of "Gunks.com" is clearly nothing more than a simple tool of MPNA. Not only has my account been locked, several of my posts there have been deleted by site management. Not for posting anything there that would be considered at all inappropriate anywhere else, either. To be very clear MPNA is a disingenuous fraud. He is asking climbers to take action against the Mohonk Preserve if court cases are adjudicated against the MP, but my posts asking him about the injunction recently granted against him (and in favor of the Mohonk Preserve) were simply ignored by him--and then deleted by Gunks.com management. It has become overwhelmingly clear that the last thing Chris Ullrich wants (or any of the others who also post as AG/MPNA) is an open debate on the merits of MP/neighbor issues. Instead, to forward his own personal agenda, he desires only a platform for posting highly biased and inflammatory propaganda aimed at smearing the reputation of the Mohonk Preserve, The Mohonk Mountain House and other local land preservation groups. And, at Gunks.com, that is exactly the situation that he has. Curt
Let's flood the bitchez.
|
|
|
|
|
rangerrob
Sep 21, 2010, 10:09 PM
Post #187 of 194
(5200 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 8, 2003
Posts: 641
|
Add me to the list of climbers banned from Gunk.com as well as Cfrac, and I'm sure a few others after yesterdays and todays wave of protest against the use of a climbing website to advance a political agenda.
That's okay though, there is a another local Gunks website that I'll be using to actually talk about Gunks climbing. TheUberfall.com. Kinda slow right now, but I am hoping it will pick up a little as I recruit banned Gunkies to it.
|
|
|
|
|
wonderwoman
Sep 21, 2010, 10:45 PM
Post #188 of 194
(5190 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 14, 2002
Posts: 4275
|
Are you kidding me? Is there anybody left over there? That's the only other forum I visit! What brought on all the banzing?
Bad, gunks.com moderator! Bad!!!! 
|
|
|
|
|
aya
Sep 21, 2010, 11:30 PM
Post #189 of 194
(5178 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 12, 2005
Posts: 4
|
I was banned too, apparently. No explanation, no nothing. I thought I'd been very civil, actually, but apparently engaging in the debate that MPNA invited everyone to join in was enough to get banned? I'm kind of confused. And amused. I hope gunks climbed can find a legitimate home on the web some day.
|
|
|
|
|
jakedatc
Sep 21, 2010, 11:37 PM
Post #190 of 194
(5172 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 12, 2003
Posts: 11054
|
you posted.. that seems to be enough aya..
|
|
|
|
|
curt
Sep 21, 2010, 11:55 PM
Post #191 of 194
(5166 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 27, 2002
Posts: 18275
|
This reminds me a little of the recent local radio show that these folks appeared on.
http://www.rockclimbing.com/...ost=2383420;#2383420
While the protagonists against the Preserve claim to "sincerely" desire direct discourse with Preserve staff, the show host conveniently "forgot" to even think of inviting a representative from the Preserve to participate on the radio show. Clearly there seems to be a pattern here--and it doesn't involve the other side of the story.
Curt
(This post was edited by curt on Sep 21, 2010, 11:57 PM)
|
|
|
|
|
donaldjamesperry
Sep 22, 2011, 11:05 PM
Post #192 of 194
(4755 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 7, 2002
Posts: 12
|
See
http://gunks.com/ubbthreads7/ubbthreads.php/ubb/showflat/Number/58199/gonew/1/Taxes_VS_preservation_have_at_#UNREAD
|
|
|
|
|
donaldjamesperry
Sep 22, 2011, 11:07 PM
Post #193 of 194
(4755 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 7, 2002
Posts: 12
|
see
http://gunks.com/ubbthreads7/ubbthreads.php/ubb/showflat/Number/58199/gonew/1/Taxes_VS_preservation_have_at_#UNREAD
|
|
|
|
|
Gmburns2000
Sep 23, 2011, 12:23 AM
Post #194 of 194
(4732 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 6, 2007
Posts: 15266
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
